Limited Mongol Influence in the Long Term

In China, Kublai did what the Romans did for northern Europe, writes John May in The Mongol Empire. By that, he means the creation of physical artifacts (roads, canals) and systems (efficient taxation, trade, postal-relay). And of course, the introduction of paper money (as an easier, lighter, convenient alternative to coins made of various metals).

~~

 

By the time Genghis died, the man had created an empire 4 times larger than Alexander’s and twice the size of Rome, ha had not made great inroads into China. His successors doubled that size.

 

And yet, while the Romans have left a lot of both “hardware” (aqueducts, stadia) and “software” (art, law, language), very little of either survives from the Mongol era. (Other than in China, as we saw in the earlier blog on Kublai).

“No buildings, no philosophies, no universities, no moral guidance, no literature for the subject peoples.”

 

Why the difference?

“Because the Romans, the Greeks and the British had something to say, apart from their military successes. The Mongols didn’t.”

One might point to ceramics as a counter-example. But that was pre-existing Chinese and Persian stuff, not something created due to the Mongols. Or as Thomas Allsen put it:

“They (Mongols) were in sum, agents not donors.”

 

Are the Arabs then a better parallel to the Mongols? Both were feuding tribes who went on to conquer wealthy neighbours and created huge empires by conquest. But while Islam is “still with us”, in strength, as a religion, and in cultural depth, nothing equivalent from the Mongols has survived. What’s the difference? In one, religion drove conquest; in the other, conquest led to the adoption of whatever faith was already there. In other words, the Arabs brought something new to the conquered areas, whereas the Mongols absorbed what was already there.

“The khans favoured religions entirely indiscriminately, depending on political need.”

Islam in the Middle East, Daoism and then Buddhism in China.

 

And yet, says May:

“There are wisps of evidence, like the remnants of a supernova, that recall the great explosion.”

An explosion of people, that is. First the conquering Mongol army, then the non-Mongol troops enlisted to fight for the Mongols, and then massive transfers of captives. Populations were mixed at a pace never seen until then.

“Each campaign was like a slow-motion explosion, scattering, obliterating and transferring tribes, ethnicities and populations.”

 

Since the Mongols were meritocratic in governance (they had to be, they had no experience of their own!), the top echelons of governance were a mix of folks from different regions, different cultures, different religions - administrators, intellectuals, soldiers, and artisans.

 

Another consequence of such a large empire was the transfer and translation of knowledge across Persia, the Middle East and China. And yet, despite the enormous transfer of people and knowledge in all directions, there were no fundamental advances to be credited specifically to Mongol influence…