History vs. Genghis Khan Alex Gendler

He was one of the most fearsome
warlords who ever lived,

waging an unstoppable conquest
across the Eurasian continent.

But was Genghis Khan a vicious barbarian

or a unifier who paved the way
for the modern world?

We’ll see in “History vs. Genghis Khan.”

“Order, order.
Now who’s the defendant today?

Khan!”

“I see Your Honor is familiar
with Genghis Khan,

the 13th century warlord whose military
campaigns killed millions

and left nothing
but destruction in their wake.”

“Objection. First of all,
it’s pronounced Genghis Kahn.”

“Really?”

“In Mongolia, yes.

Regardless, he was one of the greatest
leaders in human history.

Born Temüjin, he was left fatherless
and destitute as a child

but went on to overcome constant strife
to unite warring Mongol clans

and forge the greatest empire
the world had seen,

eventually stretching from the Pacific
to Europe’s heartland.”

“And what was so great
about invasion and slaughter?

Northern China lost 2/3 of its population.”

“The Jin Dynasty had long harassed
the northern tribes,

paying them off to fight each other
and periodically attacking them.

Genghis Khan wasn’t about
to suffer the same fate

as the last Khan who tried
to unite the Mongols,

and the demographic change may reflect
poor census keeping,

not to mention that many peasants
were brought into the Khan’s army.”

“You can pick apart numbers all you want,

but they wiped out entire cities,
along with their inhabitants.”

“The Khan preferred enemies
to surrender and pay tribute,

but he firmly believed in loyalty
and diplomatic law.

The cities that were massacred were ones
that rebelled after surrendering,

or killed as ambassadors.

His was a
strict understanding of justice.”

“Multiple accounts show his army’s
brutality going beyond justice:

ripping unborn children
from mothers' wombs,

using prisoners as human shields,

or moat fillers to support siege engines,

taking all women from conquered towns–”

“Enough! How barbaric!”

“Is that really so much worse
than other medieval armies?”

“That doesn’t excuse
Genghis Khan’s atrocities.”

“But it does make Genghis Khan
unexceptional for his time

rather than some bloodthirsty savage.

In fact, after his unification
of the tribes abolished bride kidnapping,

women in the Mongol ranks
had it better than most.

They controlled domestic affairs,

could divorce their husbands,

and were trusted advisors.

Temüjin remained with
his first bride all his life,

even raising her possibly
illegitimate son as his own.”

“Regardless, Genghis Khan’s
legacy was a disaster:

up to 40 million killed across Eurasia
during his descendents' conquests.

10% of the world population.

That’s not even counting
casualties from the Black Plague

brought to Europe by
the Golden Horde’s Siege of Kaffa.”

“Surely that wasn’t intentional.”

“Actually, when they saw their own troops
dying of the Plague,

they catapulted infected bodies
over the city walls.”

“Blech.”

“The accounts you’re referencing

were written over a hundred years
after the fact.

How reliable do you think they are?

Plus, the survivors reaped the benefits
of the empire Genghis Khan founded.”

“Benefits?”

“The Mongol Empire practiced
religious tolerance among all subjects,

they treated their soldiers well, promoted
based on merit, rather than birth,

established a vast postal system,

and inforced universal rule of law,

not to mention their
contribution to culture.”

“You mean like Hulagu Khan’s
annihilation of Baghdad,

the era’s cultural capital?

Libraries, hospitals and palaces burned,
irrigation canals buried?”

“Baghdad was unfortunate,

but its Kalif refused to surrender,

and Hulagu was later punished
by Berke Khan for the wanton destruction.

It wasn’t Mongol policy
to destroy culture.

Usually they saved doctors, scholars
and artisans from conquered places,

and transferred them
throughout their realm,

spreading knowledge across the world.”

“What about the devastation of Kievan Rus,

leaving its people in the Dark Ages

even as the Renaissance
spread across Western Europe?”

“Western Europe was hardly
peaceful at the time.

The stability of Mongol rule
made the Silk Road flourish once more,

allowing trade and cultural exchange
between East and West,

and its legacy forged Russia and China
from warring princedoms

into unified states.

In fact, long after the Empire,

Genghis Khan’s descendants could be found

among the ruling nobility
all over Eurasia.”

“Not surprising that a tyrant would inspire
further tyrants.”

“Careful what you call him.
You may be related.”

“What?”

“16 million men today are descended
from Genghis Khan.

That’s one in ever 200.”

For every great conqueror,
there are millions of conquered.

Whose stories will survive?

And can a leader’s historical
or cultural signifigance

outweigh the deaths
they caused along the way?

These are the questions that arise
when we put history on trial.

他是有史以来最可怕的
军阀之一,在欧亚大陆

发动了不可阻挡的征服

但是,成吉思汗是凶残的野蛮人,

还是为现代世界铺平道路的统一者

我们将在“历史与成吉思汗”中看到。

“命令,命令。
现在谁是今天的被告?

汗!”

“我看大人对
成吉思汗很熟悉,他

是 13 世纪的军阀,他的军事
行动杀死了数百万人

,留下的
只是毁灭。”

“反对。首先,
它的发音是成吉思汗。”

“真的?”

“在蒙古,是的。

无论如何,他是人类历史上最伟大的
领袖之一。

他出生于铁木真,从小就失去
了父亲和贫困,

但他继续克服不断的冲突
,团结交战的蒙古氏族

,打造世界上最伟大的
帝国 已经看到,

最终从太平洋延伸
到欧洲的中心地带。”


入侵和屠杀有什么了不起的?

华北失去了2/3的人口。”

“金朝长期
骚扰北方部落,

付钱让他们互相争斗
并定期攻击他们。

成吉思汗
不会遭受与

最后一位试图统一蒙古人的可汗一样的命运

,人口变化可能 反映
人口普查不善,

更不用说许多农民
被带入可汗的军队。”

“你可以随意挑选数字,

但他们消灭了整个城市,
连同他们的居民。”

“可汗宁愿
敌人投降和进贡,

但他坚信忠诚
和外交法律。

被屠杀的城市
是投降后叛乱的城市,

或者是作为大使被杀的城市。


对正义有着严格的理解。”

“多个记录表明他的军队的
残暴行为超出了正义:

从母亲的子宫中撕下未出生的孩子,

使用囚犯作为人体盾牌,

或使用护城河填充物来支撑攻城车,

从被征服的城镇带走所有女性——”

“够了!多么野蛮!”

“这真的
比其他中世纪的军队差那么多吗?”

“这不能为
成吉思汗的暴行开脱。”

“但这确实让
成吉思汗在他那个时代不例外,

而不是一些嗜血的野蛮人。

事实上,在他
统一部落废除绑架新娘之后,

蒙古族的女性
比大多数人都好,

他们控制着内政,

可以与丈夫离婚 “

“无论如何,成吉思汗的
遗产是一场灾难:

在他的后代征服期间,多达 4000 万人在欧亚大陆丧生。

占世界人口的 10%。

这还不包括

金帐汗国围攻卡法给欧洲带来的黑死病的伤亡人数。 "

“那肯定不是故意的。”

“实际上,当他们看到自己的部队
死于瘟疫时,

他们将感染者的尸体弹射
过城墙。”

“布莱赫。”

“你提到的

那些记载,是在一百多年
后才写成的。

你认为它们有多可靠?

而且,幸存者还
从成吉思汗建立的帝国中获得了好处。”

“好处?”

“蒙古帝国
对所有臣民实行宗教宽容

,善待士兵,
以功劳而非出身,

建立庞大的邮政体系

,推行普遍的法治,

更不用说他们
对文化的贡献。”

“你的意思是像胡拉古汗
歼灭

那个时代的文化首都巴格达一样?

图书馆、医院和宫殿被烧毁,
灌溉渠被掩埋?”

“巴格达很不幸,

但它的卡利夫拒绝投降

,胡拉古后来
因肆意破坏而受到伯克汗的惩罚。破坏文化

不是蒙古的
政策。

通常他们
从被征服的地方救出医生、学者和工匠,

然后转移他们
遍及他们的领域,

将知识传播到世界各地。”

“基辅罗斯的毁灭怎么样,即使文艺复兴在西欧蔓延,

它的人民仍处于黑暗时代

?”

“当时的西欧并不
和平。

蒙古统治的稳定
使丝绸之路再次繁荣起来,

使
东西方之间的贸易

和文化交流得以实现,其遗产使俄罗斯和中国
从交战的诸侯国

变成了统一的国家。

事实上, 在帝国之后很久,

成吉思汗的后裔可以

在欧亚大陆的统治贵族中找到
。”

“一个暴君会激励更多的暴君,这并不奇怪
。”

“小心你怎么称呼他。
你可能是亲戚。”

“什么?”

“今天有 1600 万男人
是成吉思汗的后裔。

这是 200 分之一。”

每一位伟大的征服者,
都有数以百万计的征服者。

谁的故事会幸存下来?

领导者的历史
或文化意义能否

超过
他们在此过程中造成的死亡?

这些是
我们对历史进行审判时出现的问题。