In less than a century, the Mongols managed to create one of the largest empires to ever exist. Their brutal tactics and nomadic style allowed them to continue expanding at an extraordinary rate which was unlike any seen before. This can also be compared to the United States of America and their rise to power.

The Mongols used superior tactics and firepower to completely eradicate everyone in their way and struck fear into the hearts of many. This was emphasized in The Perfect History, where they were compared to the Antichrist and determined to be worse than them. It was mentioned how the Mongols massacred everyone in their way to a point that not even the Antichrist would. The Mongols were also compared to Alexander the Great, and were noted to have even better efficiency and tactics than him and his empire, resulting in achieving a much larger empire in a tenth of the time. (Athir, 13.1b) However, they were also able to rule their empire with tolerance and allowed the territory under their command to have essentially complete self rule. The Pax Mongolica was shown to have tolerance of foreign religions as a primary point and to allow for intermingling of cultures to occur. Apart from paying a tax to the Mongols, life in the area proceeded as usual.

This combined mixture of absolute military superiority and hgh levels of cultural tolerance can also be seen in the rise of the United States. The United States can be considered as a melting pot of cultures, with no laws banning certain religions or establishing others as a designated state religion. Furthermore, the United States grew on immigrants coming from all around the world to form its diverse culture that we have today. However, the expansion of the United States is primarily based on its ability to be dominant over other countries and Native Americans. The primary method of expansion for the Americans was winning wars against weaker countries. Through America’s ability to win wars effectively against other countries and the Native American population, they were able to expand. The American treatment of the Natives was brutal and often inhumane. They saw them as barbarians and treated them as such. They forcibly removed them from areas that they lived in, showing cases of brutality with wars against them. However, once these lands were cleared, Americans allowed people to live on them with relatively general religious freedom.

The differences between the great, brutal but tolerant Mongolian empire and the United States of America with its militaristic methods of expansion while maintaining its symbol as the melting pot of the world are very slim. These two different empires have a large amount of similarities in their characteristics and can be compared very well.

-Eugene Om

Word Count-459

The Mongols were an unmatched fighting force that spread very rapidly with an unprecedented amount of brutality. Most people cannot comprehend how a group of people would be able to come together over such a terrible idea such as the mass slaughtering of cities. One society, that is a lot closer in history to us then the Mongols, that matched the Mongols in speed and brutality is Nazi Germany. Nazi Germany used tactics such as concentration camps and Blitzkrieg in order to rapidly spread throughout most of Europe with extreme ease. These methods were unprecedented and brutal towards the people that the Nazi’s used them on.

            Some would say that the Mongol Empire was a much more extreme take over than Nazi Germany was. They would reference how the Mongols managed to capture the most land by almost any empire ever in the world second to only the British Empire in the nineteen twenties. Although this is true, the Germans still managed to capture all of Europe during what could arguably be a much harder time to do so with the technology at the time. Also the two countries were extremely similar in the amount of brutality that they showed towards people.

            The Mongols managed to remain feared by making people feel thing such as “For even the Antichrist will spare such as follow him, though he destroy those who oppose him; but these spared none, slaying women and men and children, ripping open pregnant women and killing unborn babes.” (Ibn al-Athir, c. 1225) They were extremely violent and because of it they were able to take entire cities just by the mind games that they played. The Nazis also played mind games in order to help them conquer most of Europe. Hitler was an extremely motivational speaker and was able to rally a lot of people behind a common enemy, the Jews. Through making a common enemy Hitler was able to join groups who may not have had much in common before, but because of this new enemy, they could work together. As a result of the mind games that the Nazis played Concentration camps started to appear. These camps were extremely brutal towards the Jews and at the height of their power killed 15,000 people per day. “In fact, roughly 25 percent of all Holocaust victims were murdered from August to October 1942, which is quite likely the deadliest three months in Human history.” (Doyle Rice)

            Not only were the Nazis brutal like the Mongols, but they also employed quick attacking tactics against their enemies as well. The Nazis used an attack tactic called Blitzkrieg which means flash war in English. They would attack people by using a concentration of armored and motorized formations with close air support which would break through opponents by powerful attacks. Like the Mongols the Germans were successful in taking over land in large amounts.

            Although Nazi Germany was not as large as the Mongol Empire they were still able to match the Mongols speed and brutality within warfare. Through the tactics such as concentration camps and Blitzkrieg the Nazis were able to rapidly spread throughout most of Europe with extreme ease.

— Andrew Beck

Word Count: 529

The Mongol Empire parallels the modern Islamic State (ISIS) in various ways, including in the high level of terror that they instilled, their militaristic and expansionist tendencies, and their lack of an official “home”. Prior to their expansion, the Mongols existed to the north of China. They were nomads, separated into different tribes but ultimately united by Genghis Khan, who hurdled them into a crusade of conquest throughout the Asian continent. Still, though they were united, they remained highly mobile, which enabled them to not only move and attack quickly, but also build and maintain a widespread presence. This mobility ultimately enabled them to launch brutal attacks for expansion. The terror they instilled is epitomized in Ibn al-Athir’s “The Perfect History”, in which he describes the Mongolian period of expansion as “the greatest catastrophe and the most dire calamity… which befell all men generally”. In his eyes, the Mongol reign is the worst thing to have happened up to that point. In these attacks, as described by al-Athir, they were not only quick, but also extremely violent, slaughtering whole civilizations. In addition to being quick and violent, they were highly efficient. They employed trickery in their invasions, feigning withdrawals and then launching a surprise attack, using hostages as human shields, and exaggerating the size of their armies with dummies on horseback. This trickery, in addition to their speed, instilled terror in the people they conquered, which was only furthered by Genghis Khan’s clear desire to continue expanding (his desire to conquer is one of the main reasons why the Mongols were able to be so successful in their expansions).

Similarly, the modern terrorist organization ISIS is clearly militaristic, with expansionist visions and no clear bounds of functioning, paralleling the Mongol Empire. Although not technically a regime, ISIS functions and identifies as a state, with one of their ultimate goals being to establish a recognized Islamic State known as a caliphate. However, ISIS lacks an official “home”, as did the Mongols, which is one of the main reasons why they were able to be successful. Neither regime was tied down to defending specific land because their people moved continuously as they expanded, which put them at an advantage to other stationary empires. This also allows ISIS (and the Mongols) to be highly mobile. This mobility, similarly to the Mongols, enables ISIS to instill widespread fear because they have no boundaries- they commit acts worldwide, so nobody truly feels “safe” from them. Additionally, ISIS has a similar expansionist mindset. Although they don’t necessarily want to conquer all of the Middle East, they do want to push other governments and national boundaries so that they can establish their own state. Furthermore, the means by which they achieve their goals, similar to the Mongols, is through acts of violence. The same way the Mongols were able to use terror to their advantage in their attacks by throwing bodies into cities before they attacked and by using hostages as shields, things that contributed to their inability to be stopped by an outside force, ISIS launches violent attacks in varying places in order to show what they are capable of and to establish themselves as a threat. The terror from these militaristic and violent acts alone is enough to shake entire nations to the core. Although these militaristic acts aren’t in efforts to conquer, they have psychological effects that parallel the Mongolian physical gains.

Overall, although ISIS doesn’t exercise the same tolerance as the Mongols and hasn’t conquered vast amounts of land, they do instill the same degree of terror as a result of their mobility and militaristic, violent acts which enables them to establish a firm global presence.

–Katie Mackle

Word count: 600

Sources:

The Perfect History  by Ibn al-Athir (I used the copy from our primary sources from last week)

Spodek ch. 12

The Mongol Empire unexpectedly spread into Asia and Europe rapidly. Even when many thought of the Mongols as brutal, they still surprisingly succeeded. ISIS is one of the groups that many people think of today that could be similar to the Mongols. They spread quickly and brought in many people in order to fight for them while they tried to conquer regions in the middle east.

One reason the the Mongols were able to expand quickly was purely because of their advanced warfare. They used the idea of fake defeats where they would retreat so that the enemy would believe that they won and return later in surprise. Furthermore, they used horses and advanced archery to defeat their enemy. ISIS had a similar way of developing specific tactics for their mission. Specifically, they primarily hide in cities and communities so that they blend with locals, making it much harder for the enemy to accurately identify them. Moreover, David Ignatius points out that ISIS had an important social media presence which is important to their tactics. They create interesting and persuasive (to some) content that draws in those on the edge of their message. This use of technology was identical to the Mongols who took advantage of roads for trade and furthered science and engineering for society and war.

Obviously, one of the most important aspects to the Mongols and ISIS is religion. ISIS promotes religious violence and punishes those who do not agree with their interpretations of Islam. However, ISIS was surprisingly more relaxed on specific religious doctrines than Al-Qaeda was, effectively helping them recruit more people. This can be closely related to Genghis Khan’s views of freedom of religion. Many regard him as a ruthless leader in his later years; however, during his military conquests he tolerated all religions which appealed to many.

One reason that attributed to the success of the Mongols and ISIS was their lack of caring about borders and tolerance for other groups. Specifically, the Mongols reached outside of their empire for trade and other resources. When they conquered territories they were adaptable in that they allowed the continuance of specific group’s culture, customs, traditions, and organization. Similarly, ISIS often paired with non-Islamic groups from other regions for  propaganda and political maneuvers that supported their mission of persuasion, terror, and war making.

They way the Mongol Empire and ISIS are thought about is almost similar in a way. Typically, the Mongols are remembered as barbarians under a harsh ruler. Although true, the Mongols also did positive and inspiring things for themselves and others. However, ISIS is thought of in a similar to more radical way. They are barbarians, terrorists, animals, and this is true, certainly coupled with no recollection of doing good.

Brandon Gore

Word Count: 457

https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/10/how-isis-started-syria-iraq/412042/

https://www.21global.ucsb.edu/global-e/october-2017/mongol-hordes-khmer-rouge-and-islamic-state-non-modern-conceptions-space-and

            There are two empires that were driven by the wills of charismatic leaders whose acts defied the expectations of all around. The path of the Mongol Empire and the Empire of Alexander the Great were aligned in their creation, branched off in their existence, then their fates realigned in their fall.

            The rise of both the Mongols and Macedonians were sprung on by the actions of one man. Alexander the Great took Macedon to unite Greece and expand all the way to India while Genghis Khan united the Mongols to then expand all across Asia. These two empires both had a strong ruler who united a divisive homeland to then expand into foreign territory. They were both able to do that with the implementing of new military tactics and weapons. The Mongolians stormed the plains of Asia with unrivaled cavalry and horse mounted archers. The principle innovations of the Macedonians was the sarissae and lighter shields. This transformed the traditional Greek phalanx into a lighter harder hitting unit. The Mongols and Macedonians were able to lighten their war fighting capabilities while increasing their lethality on the battlefield. Despite their abilities on the battlefield to expand rapidly they ran their empires differently.

            The Mongolians and Macedonians were known for being tolerant of the customs of those they conquered. In carrying on the Mongol tradition of tolerance to religion Khubilai Khan even said, in regards to the gods of the Christian, Jewish, Muslim, and Buddhist faiths, “I do honor and reverence to all four (Marco Polo)”. Alexander the Great went as far as to adopt many Persian customs. He installed Proskynesis and even married a Persian women. The Persians in Plutarch’s word, “were heartened by the partnership that marriage represented” (Plutarch, Alexander 47. 8). Despite control and cultural toleration neither warrior culture liked the administration of empire. The principle difference between the two being the Mongols may not have been administrative specialist, but they would find who was and make them to it. Alexander was so focused on conquest that he did not replace the institutions and governments he destroyed very well. Mongolians were at least able to institute an environment for stability that lasted multiple generations of Khans. The Mongol Empire may have been able to last a little longer, but the in the end they would suffer the same fate of collapse that would befall the Macedonians after the loss of Alexander the Great.

            The vast empire of the Mongols and Macedonians would not stay united for long. Eventually due to succession crisis the empires would break up into smaller units ruled by the different factions pursuing power. The Empire of Alexander the Great was split between his generals, turning the once massive empire into smaller kingdoms known as the Diadochi. The Mongols followed a similar path and broke up into smaller kingdoms called Khanates.

            The Empires of Alexander the Great and the Mongols in context are vastly different but also resonate in structure of their story. The Mongols and Macedonians were internally united and then rapidly conquered vast territory. They were also, to different degrees of success, able to maintain stability through cultural toleration. In the end both empire would fall to the testament of time into smaller kingdoms.

• Robert Hatfield
• Word Count: 540

The Mongol Empire was one of the fastest spreading empires in the history of the world. Like most of the other great empires of history, they relied on their warfighting ability and tenacity to expand and conquer. The Mongols also had brutal values and laws that had to be followed by citizens. Another empire that was similar to the Mongols is the Roman Empire. Founded in 752 BC, the Roman Empire at its height controlled North-western Europe to all of the Mediterranean as well as the Near East. They expanded by efficiently splitting up their forces and delegating authority to each province. This allowed the Romans to conquer countries swiftly.

The Mongols sent invasions all around them, much like the Romans and expanding very rapidly. The Mongols were known for having some of the terrifying conflicts in human history, confirmed by the short story Perfect History by Ibn al-Athir. He stated that they ripped unborn babies out of mother’s wombs, as well as brutally murdered anyone that stood in their path. Though the Romans weren’t feared for their cruelness exactly, they were feared for their ability to fight and defeat any adversary. Their tenacity was arguably only matched by the Mongols.

            Augustus Caesar, an emperor of Rome, set a goal to rule the world. This is what caused him to seek so much land and expand his empire so much. Caesar’s success only led to more morale within his forces, which led to even more expansion. The Mongols, led by Genghis Khan for a period of time, most likely felt the same way when they were able to overtake most of Asia and Europe. The Mongols conquered modern day Iraq, Iran, Causasus, as well as parts of Syria and Turkey. They are known as the largest land empire in history.

            Mongol emperor, Genghis Khan, did not hold back when it came to mercilessness and cruelty. There was an estimated 20 million to 40 million deaths while he conducted his conquests, and this factoid clearly showed he had no regard for human life whatsoever. This is perhaps what made him and his empire so intimidating to the rest of the world, allowing him to quickly take control of so much land.

            However, everything good always has to come to an end. Both the Roman Empire and the Mongol Empire fell apart because they got too large and became susceptible to smaller scale attacks and invasions that eventually caused their demise.

            The Mongol Empire as well as the Roman Empire were two of the fastest expanding empires in history. This caused sort of a snowball effect, letting them conquer more land and kill more people. Their tenacity and war fighting skills are what brought them success, and ultimately caused their downfall.

-Peter Lohrbach

Word Count: 459

Sources: https://courses.lumenlearning.com/boundless-worldhistory/chapter/the-mongol-empire/

https://www.ancient.eu/Roman_Empire/

Roman religions in today’s modern monotheistic scope are very strange and many people cannot comprehend why someone would believe such a thing. What people don’t consider is how romans may have viewed Christianity when it made its first appearance in Rome. With things such as the eating of Jesus’ “flesh” and the drinking of his “blood” it makes since that the romans would be a little skeptical about this new religion. The romans had every right to stamp Christianity as a bad religion but because of Christian missionaries Rome was able to become accustom to it being around. This same type of tension can be seen in today’s times as well between Christians and Hindus and Muslims.

            Some would say that romans did not have the right to judge Christianity like they did. All that the romans knew was that there was a new religion surfacing that followed someone who did crazy miracles. Jesus did things such as heal lepers, walk on water, calm seas, and he raised from the dead. These things are extremely strange especially for someone who would be considered mortal. It makes sense that romans would be suspicious about a person like that or people who follow him. Pliny said that “[he] have never participated in trials of Christians” before. This shows Rome’s total lack of experience with Christians or monotheistic religions. Pliny went on to interrogate the Christians to make them change their religion. The ones who wouldn’t he executed.  This new religion was difficult to understand and it scared those who had never experienced something like it. The only reason that Christianity was not abolished was because of missionaries that they sent out. Christian missionaries were able to go out and tell others what their religion was about and why it’s not a bad thing. This lead to people understanding more of what it meant to be a Cristian and why it was not a bad religion.

            The fear of what we don’t understand can be seen today just like in Rome. Christian believers do not understand religions such as Islam or Hinduism. Muslims do not practice their religion the same way that Christians do. They also have allot of stratification within their religion. There is a group within their religion called the Sunni who are commonly linked to terrorism. This scares people and they can’t understand why someone would follow such a religion just like the romans felt against Christianity. In the case of Hinduism, Christians don’t understand how Hindus can believe in the multitude of gods that they have with in their religion. This is the same problem that the romans had with believing in Christianity just flipped.

            Romans couldn’t understand other people’s religion just like Christians cannot understand current religions in the world. If it were not for missionaries within religions then no one would understand each other and we would be in a constant state of fear. Because of missionaries in Roman times Christianity was able to survive as a religion and later become the most important religion within Rome.

Andrew Beck

Word Count: 510

The United States Naval Academy draws many parallels from Sun Tzu’s Sunzi in terms of military strategy and ideals concerning approaching war. Knowledge to Sun Tzu is integral to the continued victory and domination of an empire, as seen when he states in chapter three of Sunzi: “Knowing the other and knowing oneself, in one hundred battles no danger.” To the Navy as a whole, knowledge is of the utmost importance. Knowledge of the enemy and the understanding of how different aspects including cyber operations, air and weapon capability, and the exploitation of enemy strengths all allow the United States to better combat others. The Navy has a whole community, the Information Warfare Community, dedicated to using intelligence as a powerful weapon against enemies. At the Naval Academy, knowledge is pursued and the grasp of such is sought after. The Naval Academy requires the completion of both core stem classes as well as history and English courses to ensure its output of officers are of the most informed junior officers in the fleet. What separates Naval Academy graduates from officers graduating out of OCS and off of ROTC scholarships, is that their understanding of the Navy in all its aspects is generally higher due to military professional knowledge tests, mandatory classes like seamanship, and exposure to military instructors as well as just living in a military institution.

Alongside of knowledge, Sun Tzu preaches the values and ideals that military officers should uphold. “When military officers are sinking, they do not fear. Where they cannot leave, they stand firm. When they enter deep, they hold tightly. Where they cannot leave they fight.” (pp. 1-9, Tzu).  At the Naval Academy, students are required to take leadership and ethics courses. Similar to military knowledge and knowledge and core classes, righteous values and morals are discussed in depth with military faculty, and events pertaining to good leadership like Forrestal lectures all require attendance, ensuring that midshipmen evaluate their own moral downfalls and strengths so that they may, in this new knowledge, better themselves so that they “stand firm” and “hold tightly” to the values they are entrusted to uphold.

Of the items discussed by Sun Tzu, these are two of the most useful and applicable to life in general. Both knowledge and virtuous principles are effective militarily in maintaining freedom and promoting democracy. Sun Tzu in Sunzi writes of several concepts that still relate and are seen built into the Naval Academy experience today. His writing is very effective in this was because of its universality, and the fact that ideas that it preaches are still recognized and taught to people today. The Naval Academy in a very noticeable way, is built around these principles of steadfastness and the importance of knowledge.

–Molly Gillcrist

Word Count: 415

Back during the times of the Roman empire when the Roman polytheistic religion was at its height, Christianity was regarded as a suspicious and immoral religion. It was seen as a potential end to the Roman empire and they did whatever they did to get rid of it. Although there may be some qualms about freedom of religion, during that time, the Romans were justified in their actions in attempting to stamp out Christianity as a result of the existence of ethnocentrism.

Ethnocentrism is the viewpoint of looking at the world from one’s own culture. This often results in other cultures and religions being seen as “primitive” and strange. This also develops a superiority complex of sorts as people believe that their method of life is the supreme way to live life. Their Gods and their traditions are more right than other people’s Gods and traditions. Especially in the Roman empire, where the size of the empire allowed for great diversity and a common religion was one of the few things allowing for a sense of unity to be established, a new, radical religion could be seen as a disruption.

Furthermore, the Romans did not even know what the Christians did due to not communicating with them. As the Christian religion was so strange and completely different when compared to the Roman polytheistic religion, their traditions seemed alien. It was treated as a disease, as shown in Pliny’s letters to Emperor Trajan where he refers to Christianity as being able to seem “possible to check and cure it” (Pliny 10.96). In these letters to Emperor Trajan, Pliny continuously expresses his confusion regarding the Christian religion with himself not knowing “what offenses it is the practice to punish or investigate and to what extent” (Pliny 10.96). The Romans clearly had no idea what Christianity did or what it was and had little interest in finding out as due to their ethnocentrism, saw no reason to.

The Romans saw their own polytheistic religion as the superior one, and consequently inferred that the Christian religion was a threat to the empire. The concept of freedom of religion was not yet present in the empire. The Romans would not simply just allow a new religion to come sweeping in to displace all the traditions and customs that had been in place for centuries. It would completely disrupt everything and even allow for future large scale changes that could lead to the collapse of the empire. The Romans had a justified fear and a want to take the problem out before it became a big issue. Their ethnocentrism made them wary of Christianity and their strange, alien customs and a need to remove it was seen as mandatory in order to continue the Roman empire.

-Eugene Om

Word Count- 434