They destroyed their entire city. Burning every one of their buildings to the ground, which is very cruel. Another instance of this is shown through Rashid Fadl Abi-l’Hair writings, a Muslim historian in 1498,” These invaders burned our great libraries, broke our canals and ditches, destroyed our farms, defiled the true Faith by raising temples to Buddha…attempted to destroy our trade with paper money. ” In this instance, the Mongols take it up a notch. The Mongols completely destroyed all of Azerbaijan (this was where the Mongols invaded).
In contrast, to typical beliefs as what a barbarian fighting force contains, the Mongols had an efficiently trained, througholloy organized military, skilled in military tactics. The Mongols were well trained from birth, according to one source, “Mongol soldiers were superb horsemen, having spent all their lives in the saddle,” (W.H. p.332). Additionally, the stirrup, a powerful new invention, increased the natural power of the Mongols by enabling them to better defend and attack their enemies, according to one source, “Stirrups enabled a mounted warrior
Hitler was a powerful speaker. He told the people what they wanted to hear. Hitler planned organized the execution of thousands of jews, homosexuals, and Gypsies. Everything that went wrong he blamed on the Jews. They feared Hitler because he threatened to potentially wipe out and entire group of people.
Additionally, this means they went through entire cities and deemed everyone useless. They also killed millions, certainly more than 2 million, in China. Before their conquest, there were 50 million citizens; after, there were 9 million citizens accounted for (Doc. I). Their actions are compared to genocide.
Nationalism, despite that it can provide as a unifying force in a country, it can also cause severe competition between other nations. Furthermore, nationalism was an extreme arrangement of patriotism; the ones with nationalist impulses acclaimed their own country and put its interests before those of other nations. As Albert Einstein once said “Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind.” In the early 1900s, this nationalism established an intense competition and rivalry amongst Europe’s powers. The competing powers were Germany, Austria-Hungary, Russia, Italy, France and Great Britain.
There are many renowned historical figures in the time of the Medieval period, each leaving behind their impact and legacy. Two of these characters are Vladimir I (Vladimir the Great, Vladimir Svyatoslavich) and Kublai Khan. Both had struggles rising into power due to family lines, yet still managed to form unification and expand; the two had distinguished military reputations and strategies, also leaving an effect on the economy and their legacy. However, a few differences between the two include the religion and culture inflicted and the fall of their empires. Vladimir and Kublai Khan both had many achievements dealing with aspects of their empire and reputations and legacy, but also possessed differences in religion and declining end.
Genghis Khan Even though Genghis Khan and his army killed 30 to 40 million people through his conquering of most of middle Asia with the help of a great army, he had the most powerful attack strategy in the world. In his early days he was know as Temujin. Temujin’s early life was very harsh and brutal, he grew up in a poor village with his mother and brothers (his father was poisoned when he was much younger). Temujin and his brothers would hunt for their food and it always ended with Temujin coming back with the greatest deer or critter, he was very skilled with a bow and arrow. One day himself and his older brother were hunting and they got into a fight over a small deer, it resulted in Temujin killing his older brother and his brother
Moreover, the Red Guard had little to no mercy, incredibly relentless in their killing, and created labor camps where hundreds of thousands of innocent middle class citizens died (Novikova). The Bolsheviks
All around the world, the sun was setting on the empire that was so dominant throughout modern history. And in terms of “mistakes,” so to speak, one of the greatest ones committed by Churchill arguably could be his efforts of retaining the empire and proposing all of the racist ideology that vindicated its existence. (Heyden, 2015) It may be easy to say from today’s perspective that Churchill was just a product of his times and was tasked with what most people may have agreed with as ‘maintaining’ Britain’s status quo in the world. However, this position is arguably (or rather, irrefutably) an apologist stance that runs the risk of letting certain imperialist ideologies resurfacing in today’s global political climate. Unfortunately, many people fall victim to such a train of thought, and that is why even the most adamant admirers of Churchill still need to be honest with this ‘mistake’ he had as a leader and fully repudiate
In addition, from March 1917 until July 1918, the Romanov’s were prisoners in their own country (Anastasia Nicholaievna Romanov 3). Suddenly, a dozen armed men burst into the room and gunned down the imperial family in a nail of gunfire ( Anastasia Nicholaievna Romanov 3). Bolsheviks had killed the family, burned and burried the bodies in a mass grave ( Anastasia Nicholaievna Romanov 3). Those who were still breathing when the smoke cleared were stabbed to death ( July 16, 1918: Romanov Executed 2). It is no surprise that the theorist had thought the Bolsheviks had killed the whole family including Anastasia.