83 replies to this topic

[mariusj]

The total number of soldiers and prisoners Bai Qi killed was 1 million and 600 thousand,according to SiMaqian's ShiJi.The real amount is probably much smaller.And there is no evidence that Baiqi had ever killed plebeians, although he had many chances.Xiang Yu killed many plebeians, and he was a rare inhumane butcher in china history,but he didn't massacre every time he occupied a city while Genghis Khan did.In fact,Xiang Yu had a long way to catch up with Genghis Khan.

You think that Bqi Qi might of killed much less than what was stated, yet how do you know Genghis Khan did not kill much less? How does your logic for Bai Qi not apply to Genghis?
Xiang Yu killed as often and as ruthless as Ying Bu, or any other generals of his time. If you bother reading Shiji, you will notice that Xiang Yu is not the only one who ‘屠之.’ And how do you know Genghis massacre every time he occupied a city? Do you have any proof for making that claim?

In Chinese history most butchers were nomad, such as Manchu, Haolianbobo.

You obviously never read about the time of fragmentation, or for that matter, Three Kingdom, or N/S Dynasty, where population dropped in such drastic measure that it is hard to imagine anything but massacres and constant warfare. And these involves as many foreign incursion as there were civil wars.
Men such as 冉闵,黄巢, 朱元璋，朱棣，张献忠， are not shy of putting their people to the sword.

To generalize that most butchers were nomads is nonsensical.

[Tibet Libre]

CasualHistorian, at the time of the Mongol conquests the population of China began plummeting from 100-120 million to something like 60 mio. Although much of this was probably through the spread of the plague across Eurasia, it is clear that the socieoconomic conditions for the mass of people were far worse under the Mongols than under the Song.

PS: I like the pagoda to the left. Beautiful, looks so peaceful.

Edited by Tibet Libre, 27 March 2011 - 07:21 AM.

[CasualHistorian]

CasualHistorian, at the time of the Mongol conquests the population of China began plummeting from 100-120 million to something like 60 mio. Although much of this was probably through the spread of the plague across Eurasia, it is clear that the socieoconomic conditions for the mass of people were far worse under the Mongols than under the Song.

PS: I like the pagoda to the left. Beautiful, looks so peaceful.

It appears that the population decline is pretty well documented. As for its causation, I will have to do some reading up.

As for my original reason for posting, it was to refute the notion that the Yuan dynasty was without significant, positive achievements. I believe you phrased it in an economic term - that Mongolian expansion did nothing deemed "profitable." I supposed on a cost/benefit scale, one would have to weigh the achievements/progress against the alleged causation of population decline...something that would probably come down to subjectivism.

Paul

Edited by CasualHistorian, 27 March 2011 - 04:25 PM.

[moao]

You think that Bqi Qi might of killed much less than what was stated, yet how do you know Genghis Khan did not kill much less? How does your logic for Bai Qi not apply to Genghis?

Xiang Yu killed as often and as ruthless as Ying Bu, or any other generals of his time. If you bother reading Shiji, you will notice that Xiang Yu is not the only one who ‘屠之.’ And how do you know Genghis massacre every time he occupied a city? Do you have any proof for making that claim?

You obviously never read about the time of fragmentation, or for that matter, Three Kingdom, or N/S Dynasty, where population dropped in such drastic measure that it is hard to imagine anything but massacres and constant warfare. And these involves as many foreign incursion as there were civil wars.

Men such as 冉闵,黄巢, 朱元璋，朱棣，张献忠， are not shy of putting their people to the sword.
To generalize that most butchers were nomads is nonsensical.

I just red about that Mongolian massacred all inhabitants of a captured city every time they had met resistance. While I haven't investigated Mongolian every battle.

Bai Qi hadn't kill plebeian, as I said.So the numbers just don't make sense.well, we could just assume all numbers are truer.

Most Chinese emperor killed some people more or less, not only at time of fragmentation. And some of them seemed to like to kill people very much,just like 朱元璋. He often kill hundreds of people at one time. But it's different from "massacred all inhabitants of a captured city", which kill tens of thousand of people at least.

Nomads like to massacres. It's not only my point. I don't want to quarrel about it. I don't mean that it's nature or something like that. Manchu didn't like to kill people more than chinese after they take over the Lung Chair. You can think about the reason.

PS: The time of 朱棣 wasn't a time of fragmentation. The war lasted less than 4 years, and the people killed in the war is not many by contrast.

Edited by moao, 28 March 2011 - 10:33 AM.

[mariusj]

I just red about that Mongolian massacred all inhabitants of a captured city every time they had met resistance. While I haven't investigated Mongolian every battle.

How many cities did you read they killed everyone, and how many cities have they captured?

Bai Qi hadn't kill plebeian, as I said.So the numbers just don't make sense.well, we could just assume all numbers are truer.

There honestly isn't any plebeian in the sense of plebeian in China, but I am assuming you meant common people. I am also guessing you are counting soldiers who died after they surrender to him as non-plebeian.
But massacres doesn't just apply to plebeian. Just because he didn't kill plebeian doesn't make him killing soldiers who have surrender their weapons and are at his mercy any less barbaric.

Most Chinese emperor killed some people more or less, not only at time of fragmentation.

Never said it was only at the time of fragmentation. In fact, I especially brought up several rulers from other time that were both accepted as Han and in a time not in civil war or fragmentation.

And some of them seemed to like to kill people very much,just like 朱元璋. He often kill hundreds of people at one time. But it's different from "massacred all inhabitants of a captured city", which kill tens of thousand of people at least.

How is it different? Explain it to me.
Once Genghis captured a city, it became his. He rule them as much as Zhu YuanZhang ruled his subjects. They were at his mercy as much as Zhu had his subjects at his mercy. They BOTH ordered subjects who were defenseless to be killed. Just because Zhu bothered to make up some charges and condemn them with treason should not make it any different from ordering a city to be butchered.

Nomads like to massacres. It's not only my point. I don't want to quarrel about it. I don't mean that it's nature or something like that. Manchu didn't like to kill people more than chinese after they take over the Lung Chair. You can think about the reason.

How many nomads do you know? How many nomads did massacre? You generalize that nomads likes to massacre because in their history a few happen to ordered massacre. You can say Genghis likes to massacre, but instead you leap and made an ridiculous conclusion based on nothing.

PS: The time of 朱棣 wasn't a time of fragmentation. The war lasted less than 4 years, and the people killed in the war is not many by contrast.

Then you should read what he did after he entered the capital.
Again, its not killing people who fought you in war that I am against. Rather, its killing people after the fact, after they submit, that I believe to be cruel, wrong, and barbaric. And that is a quality that every civilization did not lack.

[Nikha]

Stop! Start a new thread.:-)The disscussion not about the tittle anymore...

Edited by Nikha, 28 March 2011 - 10:35 PM.

[moao]

Stop! Start a new thread.:-)The disscussion not about the tittle anymore...

So I'll stop. Typing so many English words everyday makes me so tired.

[Nikha]

What you are discussing is interesting but not about Cinghis Chinese or not. But keep on posting :-)

[moao]

Well，I just correct one most visible error. 朱棣 never massacred Nanjing. He just burnt the palace, in order to kill the Jianwen emperor.

[mariusj]

Well，I just correct one most visible error. 朱棣 never massacred Nanjing. He just burnt the palace, in order to kill the Jianwen emperor.

In order to justify his rule, he had numerous families put to death. In one case, even friends and students of one individual were put to death.

Compare to that, Genghis was betrayed many times by people close to him, and how many times did he have their families and friends killed?

[YuenKamSiu]

CasualHistorian, at the time of the Mongol conquests the population of China began plummeting from 100-120 million to something like 60 mio. Although much of this was probably through the spread of the plague across Eurasia, it is clear that the socieoconomic conditions for the mass of people were far worse under the Mongols than under the Song.

PS: I like the pagoda to the left. Beautiful, looks so peaceful.

That is most likely the case but it was the Mongols that brought it about to begin with.........in the end they are to blame for everything LOL.

[mariusj]

That is most likely the case but it was the Mongols that brought it about to begin with.........in the end they are to blame for everything LOL.

Are you suggesting that the Mongols were the one who brought the plague to China? If so you were wrong.

Also, the Mongols were absolutely TERRIFIED by the small pox and other wonderful niceties Song gave to the Mongols. It is a gamble whether or not a Mongol would survive a trip down south.

[Borjigin Ayurbarwada]

The great plague hit China toward the end of the Yuan, not in the beginning. The Yuan population at its lowest was probably still above 70 million and it is likely that it recovered to 100 million by 1330 before plague and further war brought the population back down to below 70 million.

[Loong]

No he does not consider himself to be Chinese (if we use the term loosely to indicate a wider use of the ethnic Han terminology). But he is part of Chinese history.

However, I will need to clarify (before another slug fest as usual). During the period, the word "Chinese" was not available. You only had Han, Jin, Mongols, Central Asians etc. The Chinese is a new concept, which is not thought of then.

This is inherent in his decisions as such.

1. Considering the "chinese" empire as a colony. He specifically revamped his central administration to only emulate the three most important function so to be able to handle the colonised region (which is the remnants of Song). These are administration (中书省）, military (枢密院), audit/inspectorate (御史台）.This is a big change from the Song administrative system. He expected the new colonised chinese to behave and follow the Mongols system

2. Eleven new independent colony (or now termed as province 省） is created. The states and its capital is (腹里-大都，辽阳省-辽阳，河南省-汴梁， 陕西省-奉元，四川省-成都，江浙省-杭州，江西省-龙兴，云南省-中庆，湖广省-武昌，甘肃省-甘州，岭北省-河林） I've quoted the actual names, which will differ from the location today. All controlled by Mongols, and autonomous, normally wiping out all previous Song admnistrative structure.

3. Classified ALL people into 4 classes. These are 1st class - Mongols, 2nd class - Central Asian (色目人） which are generally hui ethnic (回）, 3rd class - northern han (originally under the Jin's control, north of huai river (淮河）), 4th class/lowest class - Han Chinese previously under Song dynasty

4. Ranking of PROFESSION. From highest to lowest : 1. Minister/Government official (官）- 2. Public servant (吏）normally barred by being 2class citizen or below - 3. Buddhist Monks (僧）- 4. Taoist (道） - 5. doctors (医） - 6. Skill technician (工）eg engineers/architects - 7. Technicial/Craftmans (匠) - 8. Prostitute （娼）- 9. Confucian scholar (儒） - 10. beggar (丐）.


From point 1 and 2, he considers the chinese (whether under the Jin/Jurchen or Song) inferior in its administration. All administrative staff taken over by Mongols
From point 3 classifying the Hans as lowly would mean Genghis or his decendent will never owe up to be Han (note the use of Han instead of chinese)
From point 4, the central scholastic thought based on confucianism is lower than a prostitute, which means that the mongols thought lowly of the han then. (things changed over the period, but we are talking about early Yuan)

PS, taoism as quoted earlier was really not something genghis care. It was buddhism, which was propagated by one of his "state" (子国）was the favour. He had 5 state　（吐蕃,察合台,窝阔台,钦察,伊尔) with a central yuan government (which was mentioned in point 2 above splitting into 11 province.) The tupan state （吐蕃) which propagated buddhism (which is now known as vajrayana/tibetian buddhism) was in favour.


PS. I hope to provide more historical reply to back up such question than a simple YES/NO.

[YuenKamSiu]

The great plague hit China toward the end of the Yuan, not in the beginning. The Yuan population at its lowest was probably still above 70 million and it is likely that it recovered to 100 million by 1330 before plague and further war brought the population back down to below 70 million.

It makes sense seeing as how the plague first attacked China in the 1330's.

In regards to the plague itself, some historians are claiming that it was picked up by the Mongols in Yunnan

"Exchange also spread disease. In Southwestern China bubonic plague had festered since the early Tang period. In the mid 13th century, supply trains servicing the Mongol garrison in Yunnan province facilitated the spread of rats carrying infected fleas. Marmots and other rodents along the caravan routes became infected and passed the disease to dogs and people. Plague incapacitated the Mongol during the assault on the siege of Caffa in Crimea in 1346. They withdrew, but the plague remained. From Kaffa flea-infested rats reached Europe and Egypt by sea.
Typhus, influenza and smallpox traveled the same route. The combination of these and other diseases created what is called the "Great Pandemic" of 1347-1352 and spread devastation far in excess of what the Mongol armies inflicted. Peaceful trade, not conquest, ended up taking the greatest toll in lives".
-The Earth and It's Peoples, Chapter 13 page 306"