Why is Mongolia in and not Korea

Status
Not open for further replies.
And the Yuan weren't "the Mongols" any more than Queen Victoria was "the Germans". It was dynastic change- not "ethnic conquest" that Altaric Golea Nationalists like to dream about.

One thing I'm not familiar with is this "Altaric Golea" you keep talking about. I googled it, but this very thread at civfanatics turned out to be the only exact match.
I assume it is some kind of Mogolian empire?
Can you share some information about the "Alatric Golea"?
 
Altaric Golea, the Great Golea from Gojorseon to Shilla to Buyeo, ruled the Asia for 8,500 years, from the Sumerlia to the so-called "Chinees" civilization, which was headed from Great Golea peninsula by Manju-Golea-Monguar Dynasty, nida.

Altaric language is the Altaric people, being the, Great Golea Dynasty, ruling the Asia for 8,500 year

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nOqKZptYOyU
 
That's probably the same thing Thormodr's been trolling about.(I don't know for sure because I can't get access to youtube.)
I don't understand why the two of you got into such a conflict the other day since very likely you share the same point of view.
 
That's probably the same thing Thormodr's been trolling about.(I don't know for sure because I can't get access to youtube.)
I don't understand why the two of you got into such a conflict the other day since very likely you share the same point of view.

It's not trolling. Some Korean ultra nationalist historians really believe that Korea once had an empire that spanned pretty much all of Asia. They also believe that they founded Sumer, Egypt, the Indus civilization and founded the Chinese civilization. They also invented Chinese characters. So, from that viewpoint, Korea has been much more impressive than the Mongols and frankly any other civilization in the world. It's up to people to judge whether it is credible or not.

I suppose he/she doesn't find it credible at all. Neither do I. So, in that regard we do share the same opinion.

As far as saying the Mongols didn't conquer China because of some overblown sense of national pride, I don't agree with him/her at all.
 
I stand corrected. My initial understanding was that Genghis' initial attacks during the early 1200s caused Xi-Xia to submit to Genghis. It is not disputed that Xi-Xia started attacked Jin around 1211, but maybe that was because Xi-Xia wanted to curry favor with Genghis.. Bad move for them :)
Prior to the Mongols, the Xi-Xia Tanguts were mostly (sometimes?) allied with the Jin against Southern Song. GK 'forced' them to help him, in his initial forays into N China.

Then when GK went west with most of his forces, to take out the mighty Khwarzm (sp?) Turks because they beheaded his envoys, leaving behind token forces to continue ravaging N China, the Tanguts saw an opportunity to 'rebel'.

After GK finished off the Turks, he went for Xi-Xia, to make an 'object lesson'. By massacring the Xi-Xia nation and people - in short, genocide. :scared:

At least, that's what I vaguely remember fr my reading eons ago... ;)
 
Ignoring that the Song waged all-out war against the Jin, which directly led to Jin and thus Song's downfall. Headline history completely distorts the picture; China was pretty much conquered by itself with Mongols at the helm (just another dynasty).
The Song didn't really do all that much against the Jurchens - as usual (they allied with the Jurchens too, when they first invaded the Khitan Liao empire and then watched as the Jurchens conquered Yanjing without much Chinese help, and then kicked the Song all the way back to the Huai river-system with little trouble. The Northern Song very nearly perished then. But that's another story.).

It was the Mongol war machine which really carved up the Jin. The Song were very weak militarily, after the reforms and social changes taking place after the militant Tang period. Soldiers were despised in Song society; only the real poor and convicts filled its rank-and-file. The best (literal) minds went into the civil service. The imperial court was dominated by the officials. The military had its toys (massive inland river warships; rockets; primitive firearms even) but as a whole, it's terribly ineffective. Because the Song designed it to be so, so that it won't rise against the state again (i.e. the An Lushan rebellion with the crack frontier armies during the middle of the Tang, which started its downfall).

I am Chinese myself, and am as proud of my heritage and history as they come but let's be honest here. We truly got pwned and outplayed by the Mongols - that period simply isn't one of our better eras, as a political and military player.

It doesn't matter what ethnic group that dynasty was, really. This is why China structurally remained Chinese from its culture to its government to its genetic make-up. There was no "total conquest" so to speak.
The Mongols totally overturned the Confucian-styled official system, and appointed non-Chinese to tax-farm or otherwise managed vast tracts of the land.

And Chinese culture and government were affected by the Yuan interregnum. For the better I think. After the Ming drove the Mongols out, they remained militant for half a century or so, and didn't revert to the 'softie' Song-styled type of administration. The emperor actually ruled the empire. Forces were sent out to conquer inner Mongolia and southern Manchuria. Navies were sent out to 'explore' the world (more like to make everyone else kneed down at the might of the Chinese empire). The preceding Song could never do this.

And what does it mean to be 'Chinese'? The genius of China is in its ability to absorb and Sinicize large numbers of surrounding non-Chinese into its cultural fold.

Out of today's total Chinese population, very few are descended from the original people who inhabited the supposed cradle of Chinese civilization in the middle of the Yellow river-system in prehistoric times. The vast proportion of us have our ancestries in the 'barbarians' who lived in the lands bordering the ever-growing Chinese cultural heartland.
 
Altaric Golea, the Great Golea from Gojorseon to Shilla to Buyeo, ruled the Asia for 8,500 years, from the Sumerlia to the so-called "Chinees" civilization, which was headed from Great Golea peninsula by Manju-Golea-Monguar Dynasty, nida.

Altaric language is the Altaric people, being the, Great Golea Dynasty, ruling the Asia for 8,500 year

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nOqKZptYOyU
I've come across it, in some form before.

It's just an unsupported daydream... <shrugs>
 
Altaric Golea, the Great Golea from Gojorseon to Shilla to Buyeo, ruled the Asia for 8,500 years, from the Sumerlia to the so-called "Chinees" civilization, which was headed from Great Golea peninsula by Manju-Golea-Monguar Dynasty, nida.

Altaric language is the Altaric people, being the, Great Golea Dynasty, ruling the Asia for 8,500 year

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nOqKZptYOyU

Who ever came up with this needs to stop using hallucinogenics
 
The Mongols didn't play anyone off against each other. The Song and Jin were in open warfare long before they invaded- Mongols and Song were allied against Jin.
And neither did the Romans; it was a more succinct way of noting that they took advantage of preexisting political-military conflicts in [China/the oikoumene] to have the ability to fight their enemies piecemeal. Not that the ultimate goal of [conquering China/conquering the Greek East] was always in the [Mongols/Romans]' minds, and that all efforts were directed toward that goal in some sort of Cunning Plan spanning decades and employed by different rulers, of course, but if you want to avoid writing a paragraph on the specifics you shorten it to something like that.
lolno said:
And the Yuan weren't "the Mongols" any more than Queen Victoria was "the Germans". It was dynastic change- not "ethnic conquest" that Altaric Golea Nationalists like to dream about.
You're comparing dissimilar things. :p
 
Knight-Dragon
The Song didn't really do all that much against the Jurchens - as usual (they allied with the Jurchens too, when they first invaded the Khitan Liao empire and then watched as the Jurchens conquered Yanjing without much Chinese help, and then kicked the Song all the way back to the Huai river-system with little trouble. The Northern Song very nearly perished then. But that's another story.).

They still tied down their military resources and both wore each other out over the time period coinciding with the Mongol unification and Temujin's ascent to power

It was the Mongol war machine which really carved up the Jin. The Song were very weak militarily, after the reforms and social changes taking place after the militant Tang period. Soldiers were despised in Song society; only the real poor and convicts filled its rank-and-file. The best (literal) minds went into the civil service. The imperial court was dominated by the officials. The military had its toys (massive inland river warships; rockets; primitive firearms even) but as a whole, it's terribly ineffective. Because the Song designed it to be so, so that it won't rise against the state again (i.e. the An Lushan rebellion with the crack frontier armies during the middle of the Tang, which started its downfall).

The point still stands however that Xiangyang stood for 6 years, while the whole of the Middle East and Eastern Europe fell in less than two. If the Song was weak militarily it'd probably be only compared to the Mongols and possibly Jin.

I am Chinese myself, and am as proud of my heritage and history as they come but let's be honest here. We truly got pwned and outplayed by the Mongols - that period simply isn't one of our better eras, as a political and military player.

I don't think they truly got outplayed so much that they failed in not resorting to genocide and expansionism to pacify their borders when they were strong, and simply allowed nomadic peoples to become too powerful.

Killing em all on turn 100 would have avoided the whole mess ;)

The Mongols totally overturned the Confucian-styled official system, and appointed non-Chinese to tax-farm or otherwise managed vast tracts of the land.

Which of course led to their downfall, but iirc they began to put more Chinese into higher positions later on.

Out of today's total Chinese population, very few are descended from the original people who inhabited the supposed cradle of Chinese civilization in the middle of the Yellow river-system in prehistoric times. The vast proportion of us have our ancestries in the 'barbarians' who lived in the lands bordering the ever-growing Chinese cultural heartland.

I'd debate this- as far as I know from genetics research a couple hundred million are descended from the Yellow River neolithic populations, but the majority of people are probably a "mixture", yes.

Dachs
You're comparing dissimilar things.

Also, I suppose "Germans" ruled most of Europe for hundreds of years because the Habsburgs were "Germanic". They aren't dissimilar at all- sensationalist wankfests.
 
You're still comparing dissimilar things in your own effort to promote a sensationalist wankfest...this isn't profitable at all, for either of us. :shake:
 
The Song didn't really do all that much against the Jurchens - as usual (they allied with the Jurchens too, when they first invaded the Khitan Liao empire and then watched as the Jurchens conquered Yanjing without much Chinese help, and then kicked the Song all the way back to the Huai river-system with little trouble. The Northern Song very nearly perished then. But that's another story.).

It was the Mongol war machine which really carved up the Jin. The Song were very weak militarily, after the reforms and social changes taking place after the militant Tang period. Soldiers were despised in Song society; only the real poor and convicts filled its rank-and-file. The best (literal) minds went into the civil service. The imperial court was dominated by the officials. The military had its toys (massive inland river warships; rockets; primitive firearms even) but as a whole, it's terribly ineffective. Because the Song designed it to be so, so that it won't rise against the state again (i.e. the An Lushan rebellion with the crack frontier armies during the middle of the Tang, which started its downfall).

I am Chinese myself, and am as proud of my heritage and history as they come but let's be honest here. We truly got pwned and outplayed by the Mongols - that period simply isn't one of our better eras, as a political and military player.

The Mongols totally overturned the Confucian-styled official system, and appointed non-Chinese to tax-farm or otherwise managed vast tracts of the land.

And Chinese culture and government were affected by the Yuan interregnum. For the better I think. After the Ming drove the Mongols out, they remained militant for half a century or so, and didn't revert to the 'softie' Song-styled type of administration. The emperor actually ruled the empire. Forces were sent out to conquer inner Mongolia and southern Manchuria. Navies were sent out to 'explore' the world (more like to make everyone else kneed down at the might of the Chinese empire). The preceding Song could never do this.

And what does it mean to be 'Chinese'? The genius of China is in its ability to absorb and Sinicize large numbers of surrounding non-Chinese into its cultural fold.

Out of today's total Chinese population, very few are descended from the original people who inhabited the supposed cradle of Chinese civilization in the middle of the Yellow river-system in prehistoric times. The vast proportion of us have our ancestries in the 'barbarians' who lived in the lands bordering the ever-growing Chinese cultural heartland.

Well put. Chinese people have a lot to be proud of with their long and storied history. The debt the world owes China for its myriad of inventions is enormous. Like you said however, this was not one of their better eras. Giving credit to the Mongols in no way diminishes anything the Chinese as a people did.
 
I've come across it, in some form before.

It's just an unsupported daydream... <shrugs>

I figured it sounded like some crap off of a hate forum or something.

Perhaps Asia's Finest? Truly one of the most mislabeled forums out there as the people it tends to attract are anything but fine. :(
 
Again, give credit where credit is due: to both the Mongols and "the Chinese" themselves for conquering and uniting themselves, or something.
 
The criticism makes sense in the context of people viewing things like the Mongols as 'civilizations' in history the same way they are in the Civilization games. But attempting to make the discussion one whereby the Mongols really weren't involved in it at all is silly, too. You get the same thing in late antique studies - a much more apt comparison than your ridiculous harping about early modern European dynasties - with the "Visigoths", "Franks", "Vandals", and so forth that supposedly took over the Roman state. It's clear that none of these entities were "Germanic", that the whole episode is one chiefly of Roman civil wars, and that many of these identities were far from ethnic ones. Most of the "Franks" were in fact the hijacked Roman field army on the Loire River. Most of the "Visigoths" were probably a Roman army, too. That does not mean that we can blithely say that the Western Empire's death had nothing to do with outside agency, or that we can totally remove the "Visigoths", "Franks", "Sciri", "Vandals", "Suebi" and so forth from the equation. Saying "the Germans" conquered the Western Roman Empire is foolish, yes, but those groups that eventually gave their names to the states that emerged from the WRE's wreckage did exist, and while they may or may not have been the primary agents of its destruction (I lean towards "not", but that's another story), they ended up being the ones who had all the cards at the end of the hand. Look, I totally understand what you're trying to say here, I just think you're pushing things too far, either implicitly or explicitly.
 
Well put. Chinese people have a lot to be proud of with their long and storied history. The debt the world owes China for its myriad of inventions is enormous. Like you said however, this was not one of their better eras. Giving credit to the Mongols in no way diminishes anything the Chinese as a people did.
No, I only said this was not one of our better eras, politically and militarily. :p

However the Southern Song was probably our greatest era, in terms of social mobility, general economic prosperity, education, 'industrial' output, inventiness, international trade and especially cultural prowess. ;)

The loss of the north made the Southern Song a somewhat atypical Chinese dynasty. This is 'blue' maritime China at its best. Displaced to the Hangzhou area (to get out of the reach of marauding Jurchen forces), the Southern Song court turned its energies to the sea, and developed a vast marine fleet, to carry out international trade. So much so that the Chinese pushed the Arab and Indian merchants out of the international sea-trade in East and SE Asia. Remember that this was the China that developed paper money. ;)

The educational level of the general populace also reached a new high, which was probably never exceeded until way into the PRC era. It was said that every village in the Hangzhou region had a school. There were chief ministers who came from the poorest backgrounds, due to the wide availability of literal education.

And food production was greatly boosted by the importation of some rice species fr SE Asia, that enabled double or even triple plantings in a year...
 
No, I only said this was not one of our better eras, politically and militarily. :p

However the Southern Song was probably our greatest era, in terms of social mobility, general economic prosperity, education, 'industrial' output, inventiness, international trade and especially cultural prowess. ;)

The loss of the north made the Southern Song a somewhat atypical Chinese dynasty. This is 'blue' maritime China at its best. Displaced to the Hangzhou area (to get out of the reach of marauding Jurchen forces), the Southern Song court turned its energies to the sea, and developed a vast marine fleet, to carry out international trade. So much so that the Chinese pushed the Arab and Indian merchants out of the international sea-trade in East and SE Asia. Remember that this was the China that developed paper money. ;)

The educational level of the general populace also reached a new high, which was probably never exceeded until way into the PRC era. It was said that every village in the Hangzhou region had a school. There were chief ministers who came from the poorest backgrounds, due to the wide availability of literal education.

And food production was greatly boosted by the importation of some rice species fr SE Asia, that enabled double or even triple plantings in a year...

Good point. I was trying to say I agreed with your statement of how politically and militarily they weren't at their finest. I guess I didn't do it that well. :P

Certainly the Song still had a strong, vibrant culture in that era.
 
The loss of the north made the Southern Song a somewhat atypical Chinese dynasty. This is 'blue' maritime China at its best. Displaced to the Hangzhou area (to get out of the reach of marauding Jurchen forces), the Southern Song court turned its energies to the sea, and developed a vast marine fleet, to carry out international trade. So much so that the Chinese pushed the Arab and Indian merchants out of the international sea-trade in East and SE Asia. Remember that this was the China that developed paper money. ;)

Interesting, I'd never known such Chinese maritime achievements.
Do you have any articles to read about that period of time?
 
Good point. I was trying to say I agreed with your statement of how politically and militarily they weren't at their finest. I guess I didn't do it that well. :P

Certainly the Song still had a strong, vibrant culture in that era.
The Chinese themselves consider the Song to be their greatest dynasty. ;)

Due to its brilliant cultural highlights.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom