"...[T]he whole Reichstag and an astounding array of Generals had been summoned to hear his speech. Appropriately this glittering event took place in the Kroll Opera House. Hitler's speech was a long one and he used it to claim personal credit for the victories of 1940. 'I advised the German forces of the possibility of such a development and gave them the necessary detailed orders,' said the ex-Corporal to one of the most dazzling arrays of military brains ever gathered under one roof....
"When the applause of that multitude of Generals, politicians, and foreign dignitaries died away, Hitler began to distribute the honours. He created no less than twenty-seven new Generals. Mostly they were men who had commanded armies or panzer groups to win for him the great victories in Poland, Norway, and the west. But artfully Hitler arranged that yes-men such as Alfred Jodl and Wilhelm Keitel who had told Hitler, 'my Führer, you are the greatest military commander of history' got double promotions and seniority. While Gustav von Wietersheim — whose motorized infantry corps had consolidated the panzer thrust by which Guderian skewered France — was passed over because he had argued with the Führer in 1938....
"So many new promotions were announced that there was not time for the Generals to receive Hitler's personal congratulations. As each name was called, a General stood up and gave the Nazi salute....
"By the time that Hitler had finished creating Generals, and no less than a dozen Field Marshals, there could have been few men in the opera house who did not understand that this was a cunning piece of megalomania that, while thoroughly debasing the coinage of high rank, defined Hitler as the man who owned the mint.
"It was an unprecedented step. The Kaiser made only five Field Marshals in the whole of the First World War. Even General Erich Ludendorff had failed to find a baton in his knapsack. Now Hitler made twelve after less than a year of war, and the fighting had covered only a few weeks. But the new Generalfeldmarschalle were delighted. In Germany such exalted rank, from which the holder could neither be retired nor demoted (or even promoted), brought the provision of an office, a secretary, a staff officer, motor vehicles and horses, and full pay and privileges. And all this for life or until defeat. A Field Marshal ranked above Reich Chancellor in the protocol lists but not above Führer, which was a new post invented by Hitler for himself."
--Len Deighton, Fighter: The True Story of the Battle of Britain, 1977
Showing posts with label Poland. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Poland. Show all posts
Wednesday, June 08, 2011
Sunday, March 08, 2009
Happy International Women's Day
"Besides, it happens fast for some people and slow for some, accidents or gravity, but we all end up mutilated. Most women know this feeling of being more and more invisible everyday."
--Chuck Palahniuk, Invisible Monsters, 1999
--Chuck Palahniuk, Invisible Monsters, 1999
Friday, March 06, 2009
Thursday, January 08, 2009
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
Wednesday, January 23, 2008
"History of philosophy in Poland": Copernicus and others
"From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"The history of philosophy in Poland parallels the evolution of philosophy in Europe generally. Polish philosophy drew upon the broader currents of European philosophy, and in turn contributed to their growth. Among the most momentous Polish contributions were made in the 13th century by the Scholastic philosopher and scientist Witelo; and in the 16th century, by the Renaissance polymath Nicolaus Copernicus.
"Subsequently the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth partook in the intellectual ferment of the Enlightenment, which for the multi-ethnic Commonwealth ended not long after the partitions and political annihilation that would last for the next 123 years, until the collapse of the three partitioning empires in World War I.
"The period of Messianism, between the November 1830 and January 1863 Uprisings, reflected European Romantic and Idealist trends, as well as a Polish yearning for political resurrection. It was a period of maximalist metaphysical systems.
"The collapse of the January 1863 Uprising prompted an agonizing reappraisal of Poland's situation. Poles gave up their earlier practice of 'measuring their resources by their aspirations,' and buckled down to hard work and study. '[A] Positivist,' wrote the novelist Bolesław Prus' friend, Julian Ochorowicz, was 'anyone who bases assertions on verifiable evidence; who does not express himself categorically about doubtful things, and does not speak at all about those that are inaccessible.'
"The 20th century brought a new quickening to Polish philosophy. There was growing interest in western philosophical currents. Rigorously trained Polish philosophers made substantial contributions to specialized fields—to psychology, the history of philosophy, the theory of knowledge, and especially mathematical logic. Jan Łukasiewicz gained world fame with his concept of many-valued logic and his 'Polish notation.' Alfred Tarski's work in truth theory won him world renown.
"After World War II, for over four decades, world-class Polish philosophers and historians of philosophy such as Władysław Tatarkiewicz continued their work, often in the face of adversities occasioned by the dominance of a politically enforced official philosophy. The phenomenologist Roman Ingarden did influential work in esthetics and in a Husserl-style metaphysics; his student Karol Wojtyła acquired a unique influence on the world stage as Pope John Paul II."
"The history of philosophy in Poland parallels the evolution of philosophy in Europe generally. Polish philosophy drew upon the broader currents of European philosophy, and in turn contributed to their growth. Among the most momentous Polish contributions were made in the 13th century by the Scholastic philosopher and scientist Witelo; and in the 16th century, by the Renaissance polymath Nicolaus Copernicus.
"Subsequently the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth partook in the intellectual ferment of the Enlightenment, which for the multi-ethnic Commonwealth ended not long after the partitions and political annihilation that would last for the next 123 years, until the collapse of the three partitioning empires in World War I.
"The period of Messianism, between the November 1830 and January 1863 Uprisings, reflected European Romantic and Idealist trends, as well as a Polish yearning for political resurrection. It was a period of maximalist metaphysical systems.
"The collapse of the January 1863 Uprising prompted an agonizing reappraisal of Poland's situation. Poles gave up their earlier practice of 'measuring their resources by their aspirations,' and buckled down to hard work and study. '[A] Positivist,' wrote the novelist Bolesław Prus' friend, Julian Ochorowicz, was 'anyone who bases assertions on verifiable evidence; who does not express himself categorically about doubtful things, and does not speak at all about those that are inaccessible.'
"The 20th century brought a new quickening to Polish philosophy. There was growing interest in western philosophical currents. Rigorously trained Polish philosophers made substantial contributions to specialized fields—to psychology, the history of philosophy, the theory of knowledge, and especially mathematical logic. Jan Łukasiewicz gained world fame with his concept of many-valued logic and his 'Polish notation.' Alfred Tarski's work in truth theory won him world renown.
"After World War II, for over four decades, world-class Polish philosophers and historians of philosophy such as Władysław Tatarkiewicz continued their work, often in the face of adversities occasioned by the dominance of a politically enforced official philosophy. The phenomenologist Roman Ingarden did influential work in esthetics and in a Husserl-style metaphysics; his student Karol Wojtyła acquired a unique influence on the world stage as Pope John Paul II."
Sunday, December 30, 2007
Excellent Mongolia Paper
Here’s an paper comparing development in Mongolia with that of Montana and Wyoming by the Dutch Neoliberal Paul Treanor. The analysis of economic life in both Mongolia and the American West is incisive, and the prescience of the 7-year-old article is gripping, as the predicted pattern of development is what has happened and is happening in Mongolia. The example of Albania is novel and illuminating. There is no fear here to label poverty as poverty; though the evidence provided for rural Mongolian living conditions is anecdotal, scant, and out-of-date, I wouldn’t contest the assertion. The bibliography and links are excellent. The whole paper is striking, but I’ve excerpted the keenest moments, which are numerous.
Treanor concludes that the two areas are not very comparable. I wonder that a worthy comparison might be made between Montana/Wyoming and Inner Mongolia, which is “part of a larger state” where the “original inhabitants” have been “marginalised for generations”: the point near the end of the paper about a model for invasion piques the substitution of “Han” for “Europeans,” and “Mongols” for “American Indians.”
http://web.inter.nl.net/users/Paul.Treanor/mongoltana.html
"Mongolia and Wyoming/Montana
"Will regional development in Mongolia follow the model of the comparable areas in North America? The states of Montana and Wyoming (and adjoining areas in Canada) are the only region outside Eurasia, with a comparable climate and population density. At present a 'third-world' pattern, of primate-city growth and rural decline, seems probable in Mongolia. Revised April 2001....
"At present, about 40% of the population are nomadic herders, the highest percentage in the world. Standards of living in rural Mongolia are probably comparable with rural West Africa. The Soviet-promoted local industrial sector has collapsed: it was mainly in Ulaan Bataar anyway. The national economy is now dependent on the export of minerals, especially copper. Maintaining nomadic pastoralism is not a long-term option: it would mean permanent poverty. It would seem that in the long term (more than one generation), the rural areas will lose most of their population. The rest will go to Ulaan Bataar, the only large city...
"Comparing Mongolia with Wyoming/Montana
:: Mongolia :: Wyoming + Montana
[population] density :: 1,5 / km2 :: 2,1 / km2
employment in agriculture :: 40% to 45% :: 6%
ethnic origin :: indigenous Mongol and minorities :: almost entirely post-1850 immigrant
minorities :: Kazakh 6% :: American Indians 4,5% Hispanic 2%
coal output :: 5 million metric tons :: 355 million tons
"[B]oth regions have the same economic basis: mining. No major industry ever developed in Wyoming and Montana anyway: and in Mongolia the non-extractive industrial sector has collapsed. So there has been a certain convergence of the economic base - but that base is better developed in the two US states anyway. Although reports on Mongolia refer to the 'massive' Soviet-built coal mines, Wyoming produces far more coal (over 300 million tons)....
"General agricultural productivity on Mongolian territory is very low. Compare Mongolia with agriculture in Poland (still considered a low-productivity agricultural sector in comparison with western Europe). In 1997...[m]eat production per km2 was 50 times higher in Poland. These figures are for total land area, and reflect primarily the difference in climate, geography, and ecology. In fact much of Mongolia is 'agricultural land', perhaps more than in Poland, but only in the sense that herds sometimes graze there. It took about 40% of the population to reach even that level of meat production....
"The low agricultural productivity reflects the harsh climate of Mongolia. In fact the combination of cold and aridity is probably harsher than in Wyoming and Montana. In relation to the ecological limitations, the inhabitants had successfully adapted to these harsh conditions. The system of pastoral nomadism in Mongolia emerged over a period of thousands of years… It survived almost unchanged until about 1910....
"In other words, there was in Mongolia a unity of culture, history, economy and society based on pastoral nomadism....
"In contrast, the original inhabitants of Wyoming and Montana were militarily defeated, and marginalised for generations. (The Indian Reservations are known, even outside the United States, as examples of marginalisation). An entirely new society and economy was substituted for the existing version. The new population came primarily from rural Europe: for them, food production meant primarily the family farm. During the 19th century, the immigrants developed a cultural adaptation to the steppe/prairie zone: the cattle ranch.... But despite all the great cowboy mythology, the settlement of the American west was not primarily based on ranching. It certainly could not be based on ranching today: the ranch population is now a fraction of the state total....
"The first transcontinental railroad (Union Pacific) was built through Wyoming, two others through Montana. These rail lines had an important effect on the settlement pattern (more on this below). The rail lines were followed by transcontinental roads and motorways, gas pipelines, and the electricity grid. In contrast, the trans-Mongolia rail link was only completed in 1956: it is still single-track and, not electrified. There is only one ancient trade route through Mongolia (along this line), the so-called Tea Road.
"Perhaps the single most important difference is that Mongolia is not part of a larger state - certainly not a rich one. Wyoming and Montana are part of the richest state on earth. How many people would live there, if there were no federal Government transfer payments into the area? Without federal money for roads, military bases, pensions, and educational or health funds, perhaps there would be only coal-miners. A large proportion of the population, in remote areas of the USA, are being 'paid to live there', in this sense - despite the ideological and cultural commitment to the free market....
"(The location of military bases was a typical means for remote areas to secure inflows of federal funds). In Mongolia there were substantial transfers from the Soviet Union until 1989, some also in the form of military base activity. They may have amounted to 30% of GDP. However that was still small in absolute terms. It was not enough, for instance, to allow construction of surfaced roads to the provincial capitals
"A second important factor is the cultural uniformity of the United States, which allows migration to remote areas. The Rocky Mountain states in the USA have the policy option of promoting leisure and retirement housing development... But future in-migration to Mongolia from high-income areas (western Europe) is unlikely. Language and cultural barriers are very great...
"Local government in Mongolia is probably more rational, than its equivalent in the western United States. ...[T]he local government fragmentation, seen in some eastern European countries, has been avoided....
"In Wyoming and Montana there are two distinct types of local government unit: the county, and the seven Indian Reservations.... The reservations have far-reaching autonomy and deal directly with the federal Government, through the Bureau of Indian Affairs. Curiously, the United States and the former Soviet Union share this pattern, of non-comparable ethnic local government units. The Soviet Union had a standard provincial unit, the oblast, but also ethnic autonomous republics (and regions) of varying sizes. True, the system was under tight control of the Communist Party - but nevertheless the principle of ethnic government was accepted. It has survived into the present Russian Federation.... The impact of Indian self-government in the United States is limited: the total Indian and Alaska native population is less than the population of Mongolia... Montana population was 6% Indian in 1994, in Wyoming only 2% are Indian.... Probably the state borders are more of an obstacle to regional policy, than the presence of Indian tribal territories.
"The future regional structure in Mongolia
"There is no indigenous urban tradition in Mongolia, although some large monasteries were quasi-urban settlements....
"Rural densities are determined by the carrying capacity of the pastures: as low as 0,1 persons/km2 in the Gobi, 2 persons/km2 in the forest-steppe zone. Low density does not mean 'evenly spread'. Half the population lives in the three northern aimaks, containing the three main cities Ulaan Bataar, Erdenet and Darhan - on just 11% of the territory. A larger central zone has about two-thirds of the population, on one-third of the territory: it includes the ecologically favoured Khangai region. This concentration appears to be accelerating, with faster growth in the rural aimaks there. In contrast, the desert zone along the southern border with China is empty: so is most of Dornod aimak. There are also some empty areas in the mountains along the northern border, such as the Hentii range north-east of Ulaan Bataar.
"Inside each province, there is also an uneven distribution of population. The 1990 National Atlas shows, that even a nomadic population is concentrated in favourable areas. That means primarily along river valleys, and in the foothills of mountain ranges. In the highest mountain zones (in the west), population is concentrated in the valleys, and in some classic oasis settlements....
"The Gobi population is small enough, in absolute terms, to fit into a few mining and oil towns. In contrast, the forest-steppe zone will probably lose much of its population. Why this prediction? It is extremely unlikely that the nomadic pastoral lifestyle will survive for another generation: overall productivity is extremely low. If a high-productivity form of meat production replaced nomadic herding, the rural population might be partly stabilised. If not, then the rural population will have the choice of staying where they are, as the poorest people in Asia - or migrating. Given the predicted growth of the Chinese economy, and the demographic labour shortage in Russia and western Europe, emigration will probably be easier than at present....
"The exceptional status of Ulaan Bataar is obvious. The industrial centres Darhan, Erdenet and (on a smaller scale Choibalsan), are the result of planned concentration of investment. They were created by decisions at national level. […] Industrialisation of the aimak centres seems improbable. They are remote and relatively small, with no existing industry, except processing meat and hides....
"The most reasonable prediction of the future population distribution is that the majority of Mongolians will live in one city. At present the best example of 'primate city' growth is Tirana in Albania. That is also a country with extreme rural poverty, and a collapsed industrial sector. Tirana has doubled (perhaps tripled) its population in a decade. However Albania also has a rich neighbour, Italy, and an extremely high rate of illegal emigration. And it has an urban tradition in the coastal regions, and an existing urban hierarchy with regional centres. Mongolia's medium-term future is extreme rural poverty, little emigration, and 100% concentration of development in Ulaan Bataar. That suggests massive movement to the capital.
"It would be difficult to build up regional centres, as a balance for this trend (the classic French 'growth pole' model). In the west the only candidate is Hovd, and it could only serve the 3 western aimaks, with 267 000 inhabitants. In the east Choibalsan is the largest centre, but much of the region is completely empty. If it grew, it would not be a regional centre, but an isolated city in the steppe. The aimak centres in the Khangai are the best candidates, for a 'regional' centre... Although Arvaiheer is a small town, it already has a paved road to the capital, and it is growing faster than other aimak centres. But for all these Khangai towns, the problem is the same. Density is low, transport infrastructure is oriented to the capital, there are no transverse routes. If people must travel two days in winter to reach a small regional capital, then they will probably travel in three days to Ulaan Bataar instead. The 'regional pole' policies in Europe moved a selected city upwards in the urban hierarchy, to become the regional centre. This logic applies inside a well-developed urban hierarchy, but not in Mongolia....
"All in all, at least a doubling of the Ulaan Baataar population seems probable, and at least a 40% share of national population, probably ultimately 60%. The UN medium variant projected 2050 population for Mongolia is 4 398 000 so that would mean a city of 1,7 million or 2,7 million. That is not unusual for Asia: some cities in 'Inner Mongolia', part of China, are already in this size range.
"With this scenario in mind, look again at the economy and population distribution in Wyoming/Montana. What makes it different? Why don't 500 000 people live in Billings, Montana, for example? With US standards of living, they can certainly afford it. Why are they living in small towns instead, and what work do they do there? This is the usefulness of the comparison: it allows a possible alternative for the 'Ulaan Bataar scenario' to be formulated.
"From this perspective the comparison with Canada is less useful. The Province of Alberta seems the closest correspondence in terms of climate, landforms and vegetation. However, this table of the Alberta urban hierarchy (from a report of the Electoral Boundaries Commission) indicates why Alberta is not a good comparison: it is more urbanised, and population density is almost 3 times higher.... The higher population density reflects the large area of arable land in Alberta, and 40 years of oil and gas exports.
"Small-town Montana and Wyoming
"Sheridan, Wyoming is a random example. The population is 14 800, the size of the smallest aimak centres in Mongolia. Another 10 000 live in the surrounding Sheridan County. Even a glance at the the Sheridan Directory website shows the vast difference between life in a remote region of a rich country and in a remote area of a very poor country. Sheridan is 215 km from Billings, Montana, the regional centre. It is 700 km from Denver (Colorado), the nearest large city. The Chamber of Commerce profile shows it has 33 doctors and 16 dentists, 6 libraries, 3 swimming pools, 2 golf courses and 13 tennis courts, 4 local radio stations, 38-channel cable tv, and 7 banks. There is not just piped water and electricity, but a sewage system, sewage plant, and even separate storm drains. A rail line, and the Interstate Highway I-90 (Chicago-Seattle), run through the county.
"...[T]he major employers are related to the transcontinental transit function (railroad, motels), or to 'regional development' in the form of federal facilities (Veterans Administration hospital), or nationally funded government services (local government, schools, hospitals). The extractive industries are also represented, mining, wood processing. In turn this supports an extensive retail and personal services sector.
"Transit functions in Sheridan are still important. But when the railroads were the only long-distance transport, they were probably even more important. That leads to the issue of their influence on settlement. And this seems the key to the population distribution in Montana and Wyoming. Of the 21 largest settlements...14 are on a transcontinental rail line....
"A good comparison with Sheridan is the smaller town of Riverton, Wyoming, located off the main transcontinental routes.... More than in Sheridan, the major employers are government-funded, or service the local market... Riverton's regional economy seems dependent on irrigated agriculture, small oil fields, and (for about 30 years) on uranium. The irrigation was a government project: even in such a remote area, the external economy and government intervention have created high-productivity employment....
"Small-town Mongolia
"In contrast to the high standard of living in Sheridan and Riverton, rural Mongolia is still firmly in the Third World. The normal conditions of life are, by US standards, acute poverty. According to the 2000 population census, half the countries households still live in a ger (the traditional nomads tent). Two-thirds of the rural population have no electricity, only 2% have a telephone....
"In rural areas it seems that only those who have successfully continued (or returned to) nomadic herding can avoid destitution. And even those only survive, no more.
"Conclusions
"Some simple conclusions are possible from the comparisons here. The first is that the areas are less comparable than at first sight. In particular, Montana and Wyoming seem to have more energy and mineral resources. These have been developed for a longer period, so that there is a good local technical infrastructure.
"Second, Mongolia seems so disadvantaged for agriculture, that not even Montana and Wyoming are a good comparison. And this position is unlikely to be reversed, because food production elsewhere can be more easily expanded. China already produces 265 times as much meat as Mongolia. In other words, a 0,4% improvement in productivity there, means more meat than a doubling of Mongolian output. The money needed to transform Mongolian agriculture, into something like Wyoming agriculture, can almost certainly be better spent elsewhere. And even Wyoming-style rural development would still mean that most of the rural population migrate to urban areas.
"Third, a related issue: farming areas of Wyoming and Montana were settled by Europeans under very different agricultural conditions. When population was growing faster than the increase in output per hectare, the only way to feed more people was to use more land. In the last generation, that necessity has disappeared. In the European Union, huge areas of agricultural land, created in the last 1500 years, will be abandoned in the next 25 years. Market forces will probably lead to a similar transformation in the USA.... However, that does not necessarily mean total depopulation. The EU openly subsidises such areas, the United States does that more indirectly. US mountain communities still have votes and political influence - enough to get some federal projects diverted to their area ('pork-barrelling'). And they still receive pensions and health care. This hidden transfer funding slows the population mobility, for which the US is famous. It tends to fossilise the existing settlement pattern.
"Mongolian herders have votes too, but there is no 'pork barrel' for them. No rich federal government will build expensive projects in small provincial towns. The despised Soviet Union was the only state which funded places like Baruun-Urt and Mandalgovi. It is hard to imagine Japan or the EU paying to maintain such settlements - if there is no direct economic advantage.
"A fourth conclusion is that Wyoming and Montana have benefited from the multiple transcontinental routes. In Mongolia there is only one, and it passes through Ulaan Bataar anyway. It will not decentralise development....
"A fifth conclusion is about a false idea: that Mongolia can go through a social/technological phase similar to 19th century Wyoming and Montana. In other words, that it can transform itself into something like 20th century Wyoming/Montana - and yet maintain the unity of culture, economy and society associated with the centuries of pastoral nomadism. But there were no indigenous pastoral nomads in Wyoming/Montana. In the 19th century, no immigrant pastoral nomads came to Wyoming/Montana either. There was no switch from pastoral nomadism to ranching. The American Indians did not make a successful economic transition to ranching, or indeed anything else. They were sent to Reservations, and an entirely new culture, economy and society was built up around them by immigrants. Wyoming and Montana are suitable historical models for an invasion of Mongolia, not for its regional development.
"A sixth conclusion is that 'economic regionalisation' of Mongolia is difficult, in both senses of the term.... The economic-spatial structure of Mongolia is, in simple form, Ulaan Bataar plus pasture land. One city at one location, and 33 million head of livestock spread over 1,5 million km2. Of course, that is an exaggeration and a distortion - but less so than in more densely populated and urbanised countries, where there are more centres and networks of all kinds.
"The general conclusion from the comparisons here is: a Wyoming/Montana pattern of settlement and regional development in Mongolia is unlikely. A third-world flight from rural poverty into slums around Ulaan Bataar seems the probable future. The elimination of poverty in that city will probably be dependent on industrialisation - on the model of the Chinese inland cities to the south. Romantic ideas about a 'sustainable' rural development (promoted by some western activists), are not just unlikely, but unethical. There can be no 'return to tradition' here, because the country has far more people than in the traditional period. (In 1918, before the changes, there were 650 000 inhabitants, a quarter of the present population). So-called 'sustainable' herding would condemn the rural population to permanent poverty, since the inherent productivity of the land is so low. If such a lifestyle were subsidised by rich countries (directly, or through tourism), it would transform the rural areas into a 'Mongol Heritage' theme park. No population would voluntarily and permanently choose either of these alternatives: they would evade them by emigration (legal or illegal). If these were the only futures for a majority of the population, then they could only be enforced in the long term, by closing the border and making the country a prison."
Treanor concludes that the two areas are not very comparable. I wonder that a worthy comparison might be made between Montana/Wyoming and Inner Mongolia, which is “part of a larger state” where the “original inhabitants” have been “marginalised for generations”: the point near the end of the paper about a model for invasion piques the substitution of “Han” for “Europeans,” and “Mongols” for “American Indians.”
http://web.inter.nl.net/users/Paul.Treanor/mongoltana.html
"Mongolia and Wyoming/Montana
"Will regional development in Mongolia follow the model of the comparable areas in North America? The states of Montana and Wyoming (and adjoining areas in Canada) are the only region outside Eurasia, with a comparable climate and population density. At present a 'third-world' pattern, of primate-city growth and rural decline, seems probable in Mongolia. Revised April 2001....
"At present, about 40% of the population are nomadic herders, the highest percentage in the world. Standards of living in rural Mongolia are probably comparable with rural West Africa. The Soviet-promoted local industrial sector has collapsed: it was mainly in Ulaan Bataar anyway. The national economy is now dependent on the export of minerals, especially copper. Maintaining nomadic pastoralism is not a long-term option: it would mean permanent poverty. It would seem that in the long term (more than one generation), the rural areas will lose most of their population. The rest will go to Ulaan Bataar, the only large city...
"Comparing Mongolia with Wyoming/Montana
:: Mongolia :: Wyoming + Montana
[population] density :: 1,5 / km2 :: 2,1 / km2
employment in agriculture :: 40% to 45% :: 6%
ethnic origin :: indigenous Mongol and minorities :: almost entirely post-1850 immigrant
minorities :: Kazakh 6% :: American Indians 4,5% Hispanic 2%
coal output :: 5 million metric tons :: 355 million tons
"[B]oth regions have the same economic basis: mining. No major industry ever developed in Wyoming and Montana anyway: and in Mongolia the non-extractive industrial sector has collapsed. So there has been a certain convergence of the economic base - but that base is better developed in the two US states anyway. Although reports on Mongolia refer to the 'massive' Soviet-built coal mines, Wyoming produces far more coal (over 300 million tons)....
"General agricultural productivity on Mongolian territory is very low. Compare Mongolia with agriculture in Poland (still considered a low-productivity agricultural sector in comparison with western Europe). In 1997...[m]eat production per km2 was 50 times higher in Poland. These figures are for total land area, and reflect primarily the difference in climate, geography, and ecology. In fact much of Mongolia is 'agricultural land', perhaps more than in Poland, but only in the sense that herds sometimes graze there. It took about 40% of the population to reach even that level of meat production....
"The low agricultural productivity reflects the harsh climate of Mongolia. In fact the combination of cold and aridity is probably harsher than in Wyoming and Montana. In relation to the ecological limitations, the inhabitants had successfully adapted to these harsh conditions. The system of pastoral nomadism in Mongolia emerged over a period of thousands of years… It survived almost unchanged until about 1910....
"In other words, there was in Mongolia a unity of culture, history, economy and society based on pastoral nomadism....
"In contrast, the original inhabitants of Wyoming and Montana were militarily defeated, and marginalised for generations. (The Indian Reservations are known, even outside the United States, as examples of marginalisation). An entirely new society and economy was substituted for the existing version. The new population came primarily from rural Europe: for them, food production meant primarily the family farm. During the 19th century, the immigrants developed a cultural adaptation to the steppe/prairie zone: the cattle ranch.... But despite all the great cowboy mythology, the settlement of the American west was not primarily based on ranching. It certainly could not be based on ranching today: the ranch population is now a fraction of the state total....
"The first transcontinental railroad (Union Pacific) was built through Wyoming, two others through Montana. These rail lines had an important effect on the settlement pattern (more on this below). The rail lines were followed by transcontinental roads and motorways, gas pipelines, and the electricity grid. In contrast, the trans-Mongolia rail link was only completed in 1956: it is still single-track and, not electrified. There is only one ancient trade route through Mongolia (along this line), the so-called Tea Road.
"Perhaps the single most important difference is that Mongolia is not part of a larger state - certainly not a rich one. Wyoming and Montana are part of the richest state on earth. How many people would live there, if there were no federal Government transfer payments into the area? Without federal money for roads, military bases, pensions, and educational or health funds, perhaps there would be only coal-miners. A large proportion of the population, in remote areas of the USA, are being 'paid to live there', in this sense - despite the ideological and cultural commitment to the free market....
"(The location of military bases was a typical means for remote areas to secure inflows of federal funds). In Mongolia there were substantial transfers from the Soviet Union until 1989, some also in the form of military base activity. They may have amounted to 30% of GDP. However that was still small in absolute terms. It was not enough, for instance, to allow construction of surfaced roads to the provincial capitals
"A second important factor is the cultural uniformity of the United States, which allows migration to remote areas. The Rocky Mountain states in the USA have the policy option of promoting leisure and retirement housing development... But future in-migration to Mongolia from high-income areas (western Europe) is unlikely. Language and cultural barriers are very great...
"Local government in Mongolia is probably more rational, than its equivalent in the western United States. ...[T]he local government fragmentation, seen in some eastern European countries, has been avoided....
"In Wyoming and Montana there are two distinct types of local government unit: the county, and the seven Indian Reservations.... The reservations have far-reaching autonomy and deal directly with the federal Government, through the Bureau of Indian Affairs. Curiously, the United States and the former Soviet Union share this pattern, of non-comparable ethnic local government units. The Soviet Union had a standard provincial unit, the oblast, but also ethnic autonomous republics (and regions) of varying sizes. True, the system was under tight control of the Communist Party - but nevertheless the principle of ethnic government was accepted. It has survived into the present Russian Federation.... The impact of Indian self-government in the United States is limited: the total Indian and Alaska native population is less than the population of Mongolia... Montana population was 6% Indian in 1994, in Wyoming only 2% are Indian.... Probably the state borders are more of an obstacle to regional policy, than the presence of Indian tribal territories.
"The future regional structure in Mongolia
"There is no indigenous urban tradition in Mongolia, although some large monasteries were quasi-urban settlements....
"Rural densities are determined by the carrying capacity of the pastures: as low as 0,1 persons/km2 in the Gobi, 2 persons/km2 in the forest-steppe zone. Low density does not mean 'evenly spread'. Half the population lives in the three northern aimaks, containing the three main cities Ulaan Bataar, Erdenet and Darhan - on just 11% of the territory. A larger central zone has about two-thirds of the population, on one-third of the territory: it includes the ecologically favoured Khangai region. This concentration appears to be accelerating, with faster growth in the rural aimaks there. In contrast, the desert zone along the southern border with China is empty: so is most of Dornod aimak. There are also some empty areas in the mountains along the northern border, such as the Hentii range north-east of Ulaan Bataar.
"Inside each province, there is also an uneven distribution of population. The 1990 National Atlas shows, that even a nomadic population is concentrated in favourable areas. That means primarily along river valleys, and in the foothills of mountain ranges. In the highest mountain zones (in the west), population is concentrated in the valleys, and in some classic oasis settlements....
"The Gobi population is small enough, in absolute terms, to fit into a few mining and oil towns. In contrast, the forest-steppe zone will probably lose much of its population. Why this prediction? It is extremely unlikely that the nomadic pastoral lifestyle will survive for another generation: overall productivity is extremely low. If a high-productivity form of meat production replaced nomadic herding, the rural population might be partly stabilised. If not, then the rural population will have the choice of staying where they are, as the poorest people in Asia - or migrating. Given the predicted growth of the Chinese economy, and the demographic labour shortage in Russia and western Europe, emigration will probably be easier than at present....
"The exceptional status of Ulaan Bataar is obvious. The industrial centres Darhan, Erdenet and (on a smaller scale Choibalsan), are the result of planned concentration of investment. They were created by decisions at national level. […] Industrialisation of the aimak centres seems improbable. They are remote and relatively small, with no existing industry, except processing meat and hides....
"The most reasonable prediction of the future population distribution is that the majority of Mongolians will live in one city. At present the best example of 'primate city' growth is Tirana in Albania. That is also a country with extreme rural poverty, and a collapsed industrial sector. Tirana has doubled (perhaps tripled) its population in a decade. However Albania also has a rich neighbour, Italy, and an extremely high rate of illegal emigration. And it has an urban tradition in the coastal regions, and an existing urban hierarchy with regional centres. Mongolia's medium-term future is extreme rural poverty, little emigration, and 100% concentration of development in Ulaan Bataar. That suggests massive movement to the capital.
"It would be difficult to build up regional centres, as a balance for this trend (the classic French 'growth pole' model). In the west the only candidate is Hovd, and it could only serve the 3 western aimaks, with 267 000 inhabitants. In the east Choibalsan is the largest centre, but much of the region is completely empty. If it grew, it would not be a regional centre, but an isolated city in the steppe. The aimak centres in the Khangai are the best candidates, for a 'regional' centre... Although Arvaiheer is a small town, it already has a paved road to the capital, and it is growing faster than other aimak centres. But for all these Khangai towns, the problem is the same. Density is low, transport infrastructure is oriented to the capital, there are no transverse routes. If people must travel two days in winter to reach a small regional capital, then they will probably travel in three days to Ulaan Bataar instead. The 'regional pole' policies in Europe moved a selected city upwards in the urban hierarchy, to become the regional centre. This logic applies inside a well-developed urban hierarchy, but not in Mongolia....
"All in all, at least a doubling of the Ulaan Baataar population seems probable, and at least a 40% share of national population, probably ultimately 60%. The UN medium variant projected 2050 population for Mongolia is 4 398 000 so that would mean a city of 1,7 million or 2,7 million. That is not unusual for Asia: some cities in 'Inner Mongolia', part of China, are already in this size range.
"With this scenario in mind, look again at the economy and population distribution in Wyoming/Montana. What makes it different? Why don't 500 000 people live in Billings, Montana, for example? With US standards of living, they can certainly afford it. Why are they living in small towns instead, and what work do they do there? This is the usefulness of the comparison: it allows a possible alternative for the 'Ulaan Bataar scenario' to be formulated.
"From this perspective the comparison with Canada is less useful. The Province of Alberta seems the closest correspondence in terms of climate, landforms and vegetation. However, this table of the Alberta urban hierarchy (from a report of the Electoral Boundaries Commission) indicates why Alberta is not a good comparison: it is more urbanised, and population density is almost 3 times higher.... The higher population density reflects the large area of arable land in Alberta, and 40 years of oil and gas exports.
"Small-town Montana and Wyoming
"Sheridan, Wyoming is a random example. The population is 14 800, the size of the smallest aimak centres in Mongolia. Another 10 000 live in the surrounding Sheridan County. Even a glance at the the Sheridan Directory website shows the vast difference between life in a remote region of a rich country and in a remote area of a very poor country. Sheridan is 215 km from Billings, Montana, the regional centre. It is 700 km from Denver (Colorado), the nearest large city. The Chamber of Commerce profile shows it has 33 doctors and 16 dentists, 6 libraries, 3 swimming pools, 2 golf courses and 13 tennis courts, 4 local radio stations, 38-channel cable tv, and 7 banks. There is not just piped water and electricity, but a sewage system, sewage plant, and even separate storm drains. A rail line, and the Interstate Highway I-90 (Chicago-Seattle), run through the county.
"...[T]he major employers are related to the transcontinental transit function (railroad, motels), or to 'regional development' in the form of federal facilities (Veterans Administration hospital), or nationally funded government services (local government, schools, hospitals). The extractive industries are also represented, mining, wood processing. In turn this supports an extensive retail and personal services sector.
"Transit functions in Sheridan are still important. But when the railroads were the only long-distance transport, they were probably even more important. That leads to the issue of their influence on settlement. And this seems the key to the population distribution in Montana and Wyoming. Of the 21 largest settlements...14 are on a transcontinental rail line....
"A good comparison with Sheridan is the smaller town of Riverton, Wyoming, located off the main transcontinental routes.... More than in Sheridan, the major employers are government-funded, or service the local market... Riverton's regional economy seems dependent on irrigated agriculture, small oil fields, and (for about 30 years) on uranium. The irrigation was a government project: even in such a remote area, the external economy and government intervention have created high-productivity employment....
"Small-town Mongolia
"In contrast to the high standard of living in Sheridan and Riverton, rural Mongolia is still firmly in the Third World. The normal conditions of life are, by US standards, acute poverty. According to the 2000 population census, half the countries households still live in a ger (the traditional nomads tent). Two-thirds of the rural population have no electricity, only 2% have a telephone....
"In rural areas it seems that only those who have successfully continued (or returned to) nomadic herding can avoid destitution. And even those only survive, no more.
"Conclusions
"Some simple conclusions are possible from the comparisons here. The first is that the areas are less comparable than at first sight. In particular, Montana and Wyoming seem to have more energy and mineral resources. These have been developed for a longer period, so that there is a good local technical infrastructure.
"Second, Mongolia seems so disadvantaged for agriculture, that not even Montana and Wyoming are a good comparison. And this position is unlikely to be reversed, because food production elsewhere can be more easily expanded. China already produces 265 times as much meat as Mongolia. In other words, a 0,4% improvement in productivity there, means more meat than a doubling of Mongolian output. The money needed to transform Mongolian agriculture, into something like Wyoming agriculture, can almost certainly be better spent elsewhere. And even Wyoming-style rural development would still mean that most of the rural population migrate to urban areas.
"Third, a related issue: farming areas of Wyoming and Montana were settled by Europeans under very different agricultural conditions. When population was growing faster than the increase in output per hectare, the only way to feed more people was to use more land. In the last generation, that necessity has disappeared. In the European Union, huge areas of agricultural land, created in the last 1500 years, will be abandoned in the next 25 years. Market forces will probably lead to a similar transformation in the USA.... However, that does not necessarily mean total depopulation. The EU openly subsidises such areas, the United States does that more indirectly. US mountain communities still have votes and political influence - enough to get some federal projects diverted to their area ('pork-barrelling'). And they still receive pensions and health care. This hidden transfer funding slows the population mobility, for which the US is famous. It tends to fossilise the existing settlement pattern.
"Mongolian herders have votes too, but there is no 'pork barrel' for them. No rich federal government will build expensive projects in small provincial towns. The despised Soviet Union was the only state which funded places like Baruun-Urt and Mandalgovi. It is hard to imagine Japan or the EU paying to maintain such settlements - if there is no direct economic advantage.
"A fourth conclusion is that Wyoming and Montana have benefited from the multiple transcontinental routes. In Mongolia there is only one, and it passes through Ulaan Bataar anyway. It will not decentralise development....
"A fifth conclusion is about a false idea: that Mongolia can go through a social/technological phase similar to 19th century Wyoming and Montana. In other words, that it can transform itself into something like 20th century Wyoming/Montana - and yet maintain the unity of culture, economy and society associated with the centuries of pastoral nomadism. But there were no indigenous pastoral nomads in Wyoming/Montana. In the 19th century, no immigrant pastoral nomads came to Wyoming/Montana either. There was no switch from pastoral nomadism to ranching. The American Indians did not make a successful economic transition to ranching, or indeed anything else. They were sent to Reservations, and an entirely new culture, economy and society was built up around them by immigrants. Wyoming and Montana are suitable historical models for an invasion of Mongolia, not for its regional development.
"A sixth conclusion is that 'economic regionalisation' of Mongolia is difficult, in both senses of the term.... The economic-spatial structure of Mongolia is, in simple form, Ulaan Bataar plus pasture land. One city at one location, and 33 million head of livestock spread over 1,5 million km2. Of course, that is an exaggeration and a distortion - but less so than in more densely populated and urbanised countries, where there are more centres and networks of all kinds.
"The general conclusion from the comparisons here is: a Wyoming/Montana pattern of settlement and regional development in Mongolia is unlikely. A third-world flight from rural poverty into slums around Ulaan Bataar seems the probable future. The elimination of poverty in that city will probably be dependent on industrialisation - on the model of the Chinese inland cities to the south. Romantic ideas about a 'sustainable' rural development (promoted by some western activists), are not just unlikely, but unethical. There can be no 'return to tradition' here, because the country has far more people than in the traditional period. (In 1918, before the changes, there were 650 000 inhabitants, a quarter of the present population). So-called 'sustainable' herding would condemn the rural population to permanent poverty, since the inherent productivity of the land is so low. If such a lifestyle were subsidised by rich countries (directly, or through tourism), it would transform the rural areas into a 'Mongol Heritage' theme park. No population would voluntarily and permanently choose either of these alternatives: they would evade them by emigration (legal or illegal). If these were the only futures for a majority of the population, then they could only be enforced in the long term, by closing the border and making the country a prison."
Monday, October 10, 2005
selected quotations from *Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World* by Jack Weatherford, copyright 2004
In twenty-five years, the Mongol army subjugated more lands and people than the Romans had conquered in four hundred years. Genghis Khan, together with his sons and grandsons, conquered the most densely populated civilizations of the thirteenth century. Whether measured by the total number of people defeated, the sum of the countries annexed, or by the total area occupied, Genghis Khan conquered more than twice as much as any other man in history. The hooves of the Mongol warriors' horses splashed in the waters of every river and lake from the Pacific Ocean to the Mediterranean Sea. At its zenith, the empire covered between 11 and 12 million contiguous square miles, an area about the size of the African continent and considerably larger than North America, including the United States, Canada, Mexico, Central America, and the islands of the Caribbean combined. It stretched from the snowy tundra of Siberia to the hot plains of India, from the rice paddies of Vietnam to the wheat fields of Hungary, and from Korea to the Balkans. The majority of people today live in countries conquered by the Mongols; on the modern map, Genghis Khan's conquests include thirty countries with well over 3 billion people. The most astonishing aspect of this achievement is that the entire Mongol tribe under him numbered around a million, smaller than the workforce of some modern corporations. From this million, he recruited his army, which was comprised of no more than one hundred thousand warriors—a group that could comfortably fit into the larger sports stadiums of the modern era.
In American terms, the accomplishment of Genghis Khan might be understood if the United States, instead of being created by a group of educated merchants or wealthy planters, had been founded by one of its illiterate slaves, who, by the sheer force of personality, charisma, and determination, liberated America from foreign rule, united the people, created an alphabet, wrote the constitution, established universal religious freedom, invented a new system of warfare, marched an army from Canada to Brazil, and opened roads of commerce in a free-trade zone that stretched across the continents. On every level and from any perspective, the scale and scope of Genghis Khan's accomplishments challenge the limits of imagination and tax the resources of scholarly explanation.
* * *
In nearly every country touched by the Mongols, the initial destruction and shock of conquest by an unknown tribe yielded quickly to an unprecedented rise in cultural communication, expanded trade, and improved civilization. In Europe, the Mongols slaughtered the aristocratic knighthood of the continent, but, disappointed with the general poverty of the area compared with the Chinese and Muslim countries, turned away and did not bother to conquer the cities, loot the countries, or incorporate them into the expanding empire. In the end, Europe suffered the least yet acquired all the advantages of contact through merchants such as the Polo family of Venice and envoys exchanged between the Mongol khans and the popes and kings of Europe. The new technology, knowledge, and commercial wealth created the Renaissance in which Europe rediscovered some of its prior culture, but more importantly, absorbed the technology for printing, firearms, the compass, and the abacus from the East. As English scientist Roger Bacon observed in the thirteenth century, the Mongols succeeded not merely from martial superiority; rather, "they have succeeded by means of science." Although the Mongols "are eager for war," they have advanced so far because they "devote their leisure to the principles of philosophy."
[…]
With so many accomplishments by the Mongols, it hardly seems surprising that Geoffrey Chaucer, the first author in the English language, devoted the longest story in The Canterbury Tales to the Asian conqueror Genghis Khan of the Mongols. He wrote in undisguised awe of him and his accomplishments. Yet, in fact, we are surprised that the learned men of the Renaissance could make such comments about the Mongols, whom the rest of the world now view as the quintessential, bloodthirsty barbarians. The portrait of the Mongols left by Chaucer or Bacon bears little resemblance to the images we know from later books or films that portray Genghis Khan and his army as savage hordes lusting after gold, women, and blood.
* * *
With Genghis Khan's decision to cross the Gobi and invade the Jurched in 1211, he had begun not just another Chinese border war: He had lit a conflagration that would eventually consume the world. No one, not even Genghis Khan, could have seen what was coming. He showed no sign of any global ambitions inasmuch as he fought only one war at a time, and for him the time had come to fight the Jurched. But starting from the Jurched campaign, the well-trained and tightly organized Mongol army would charge out of its highland home and overrun everything from the Indus River to the Danube, from the Pacific Ocean to the Mediterranean Sea. In a flash, only thirty years, the Mongol warriors would defeat every army, capture every fort, and bring down the walls of every city they encountered. Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, and Hindus would soon kneel before the dusty boots of illiterate young Mongol horsemen.
* * *
Although Guchlug was originally a Christian and the Black Khitan were Buddhists, they shared a common mistrust of the Uighur subjects, who were Muslims. In his newly acquired position as ruler of the kingdom, Guchlug began to persecute his Muslim subjects by limiting the practice of their religion. He forbade the call to prayer and prohibited public worship or religious study. When Guchlug left the capital of Balasagun on a campaign, his subjects closed the city gates behind him and tried to prevent his return. In retaliation, he besieged the capital, conquered it, and then razed it.
Without a Muslim ruler willing to protect them, the Muslims of Balasagun turned to Genghis Khan to overthrow their oppressive king. Though the Mongol army was stationed twenty-five hundred miles away, Genghis Khan ordered Jebe to lead twenty thousand Mongol soldiers across the length of Asia and defend the Muslims.
Because the Mongols conducted the campaign at the request of the Uighur Muslims, they did not allow plunder, destroy property, or endanger the lives of civilians. Instead, Jebe's army defeated the army of Guchlug and had him beheaded. Following the execution, the Mongols sent a herald to Kashgar to proclaim the end of religious persecution and the restoration of religious freedom in each community. According to the Persian historian Juvaini, the people of Kashgar proclaimed the Mongols "to be one of the mercies of the Lord and one of the bounties of divine grace."
Although Persian and other Muslim chroniclers recorded the episode in tremendous detail, the Secret History of the Mongols summed up the entire campaign in one simple sentence. "Jebe pursued Guchlug Khan of the Naiman, overtook him at the Yellow Cliff, destroyed him, and came home." From the Mongol perspective, that is probably all that mattered. Jebe had killed the enemy and returned home safely.
* * *
The Mongol army had accomplished in a mere two years what the European Crusaders from the West and the Seljuk Turks from the East had failed to do in two centuries of sustained effort. They had conquered Baghdad, the heart of the Arab world.
* * *
Near the end of 1253, the Year of the Ox, William of Rubruck, a Franciscan monk, came to the Mongol court as an envoy from the French king.
[…]
Despite the common religion, Rubruck greatly resented the Assyrian, Armenian, and Orthodox Christians at the Mongol court. Since he considered all non-Catholics to be heretics, he contemptuously designated the Mongol congregants of the Assyrian Church as Nestorians in reference to Nestorius, the fifth-century Patriarch of Constantinople who was condemned as a heretic by the Council of Ephesus in 431. Among the Assyrian beliefs that Rubruck held to be heretical was that the Virgin Mary was the mother of Christ, but not the mother of God. They also differed from the Catholics in their steadfast refusal to portray Christ on the cross as a violation of the Mongol taboos on depicting death or blood. Even when they admitted to being Christians, Mongols did not consider their religion as their primary identification. As one of the Mongol generals who was a follower of Christianity explained, he was no Christian—he was a Mongol.
[…]
Rubruck informed the officials that he knew the word of God and had come to spread it. In front of the assembled representatives of the various religions, the khan asked Rubruck to explain to them the word of God. Rubruck stumbled over a few phrases and stressed the importance to Christians of the commandment to love God, whereupon one of the Muslim clerics asked him incredulously, "Is there any man who does not love God?"
The discussion continued for some time, and according to Rubruck's own account, it was obvious that he did not fare well in the sometimes acrimonious arguments. He was unaccustomed to debating with people who did not share his basic assumptions of Catholic Christianity. Evidently, Mongke Khan recognized the problems he was having and suggested that all the scholars present take time to write out their thoughts more clearly and then return for a fuller discussion and debate of the issues.
The Mongols loved competitions of all sorts, and they organized debates among rival religions the same way they organized wrestling matches. It began on a specific date with a panel of judges to oversee it. In this case Mongke Khan ordered them to debate before three judges: a Christian, a Muslim, and a Buddhist. A large audience assembled to watch the affair, which began with great seriousness and formality.
As these men gathered together in all their robes and regalia in the tents on the dusty plains of Mongolia, they were doing something that no other set of scholars or theologians had ever done in history. It is doubtful that representatives of so many types of Christianity had come to a single meeting, and certainly they had not debated, as equals, with representatives of the various Muslim and Buddhist faiths. The religious scholars had to compete on the basis of their beliefs and ideas, using no weapons or the authority of any ruler or army behind them. They could use only words and logic to test the ability of their ideas to persuade.
Their debate ranged back and forth over the topics of evil versus good, God's nature, what happens to the souls of animals, the existence of reincarnation, and whether God had created evil. Between each round of wrestling, Mongol athletes would drink fermented mare's milk; in keeping with that tradition, after each round of the debate, the learned men paused to drink deeply in preparation for the next match.
No side seemed to convince the other of anything. At the end of the debate, they concluded the way most Mongol celebrations concluded, with everyone simply too drunk to continue.
While the clerics debated at Karakorum, their religious brethren were hacking at each other and burning one another alive in other parts of the world outside the Mongol Empire. At almost the same time of Rubruck's debate in Mongolia, his sponsor, King Louis IX, was busy rounding up all Talmudic texts and other books of the Jews. The devout king had the Hebrew manuscripts heaped into great piles and set afire. During Rubruck's absence from France, his fellow countrymen burned some twelve thousand hand-written and illuminated Jewish books. For these and other great services to the furtherance of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, his church canonized him as Saint Louis, thereby making him a figure of veneration that good Christians could emulate and to whom they could pray as an intermediary between humans and God.
A few days after the debate at Karakorum, Mongke Khan summoned Rubruck to discharge him and send him back to his home country. He took this occasion to explain to the priest, and through him to the rulers of Europe, that he himself belonged to no single religion, and he lectured Rubruck on Mongol beliefs about tolerance and goodness.
* * *
Thus, between 1242 and 1293, the Mongol expansion reached its maximum, and four battles marked the outer borders of the Mongol world—Poland, Egypt, Java, and Japan. The area inside those four points had suffered devastating conquests and radical adjustments to a markedly different kind of rule, but they were about to enjoy an unprecedented century of political peace with a commercial, technological, and intellectual explosion unlike any in prior history.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
