Advertisements
Advertisements
Question
'If history relies upon written records produced by city-based literati, nomadic societies will always receive a hostile representation.' Would you agree with this statement? Does it explain the reason why Persian chronicles produced such inflated figures of casualties resulting from Mongol campaigns?
Solution
Yes, I agree with this statement. To understand how I reached this conclusion, let’s reflect on the representation of the Mongols in a Persian chronicle.
Juwaini writes that 13,00,000 people were killed in Merv by Genghis Khan. According to him, it took 13 days to count the dead. Almost 1,00,000 corpses were counted each day.
Several historians believe that such impossible numbers are nothing more than exaggerated accounts of Persian chroniclers. The main reason for such an expression could be the terror created by Genghis Khan during his ruthless campaigns. Genghis Khan annihilated and massacred without mercy. The Persian terrified and filled with anger for Genghis Khan portrayed him as a ruthless conqueror and stated exaggerated accounts of his killings.
APPEARS IN
RELATED QUESTIONS
Why was trade so significant to the Mongols?
Why did Genghis Khan feel the need to fragment the Mongol tribes into new social and military groupings?
How do later Mongol reflections on the yasa bring out the uneasy relationship they had with the memory of Genghis Khan?
Keeping the nomadic element of the Mongol and Bedouin societies in mind, how, in your opinion, did their respective historical experiences differ? What explanations would you suggest account for these difference?
How does the following account enlarge upon the character of the Pax Mongolica created by the Mongols by the middle of the thirteenth century'?
