Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: muawiyah

Yes*blush* But it is true the Mongols conquered most of Easrern Europe--west of Kiev (not quite to Vienna) but close..and still that part of the world did not devolve afterwards to what Moslem lands did.


9 posted on 04/08/2005 9:43:08 PM PDT by the Real fifi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]


To: the Real fifi

Where did Attila the Hun come in? Were Huns also Mongols?


10 posted on 04/08/2005 9:44:08 PM PDT by keithtoo (Kennedy - he's of Irish extraction, but under the influence of Scotch most of the time.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: the Real fifi
Actually, in conquering Eastern Europe the Mongols were dealing with people not much different than the more primitive tribes to the North of Mongolia.

They were not highly motivated to keep their hands on the place since it would require substantial investment to bring about a return in trade sufficient to overcome the cost of the conquest. If anything, the Mongols thought about Eastern Europe pretty much the way we, today, think of North Korea.

Your supposition that Eastern Europe didn't suffer to the degree found in Arabia presumed some sort of equality of condition.

There was no such equality. You would have much preferred Baghdad as a hometown even after the Mongol conquest.

The Mongols made normal trade arrangements with the portions of the West that could provide them with furs and dried fish, or which had already had a longstanding relationship with Mongol interests. These places include Hungary, Estonia and Finland (all of which ended up adopting an Uralic-Altaic language as their own).

12 posted on 04/08/2005 9:52:53 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson