Chapter 18: Nomadic Empires and Eurasian Integration

 

 

Vocabulary

 

 

Focus Question #1

            Compare and contrast Mongol rule in Persia and China.

 

            Mongol rule in Persia and China was similar in that they were both controlled by the Mongols for long periods of times. However, the two contrasted in that the Mongol’s rule over Persia was brutal and at first they destroyed the vast majority of large Persian cities, while their conquering of China took many years and in which rule was not as strict.

            The Mongols, in response to Persians murdering Mongol merchants, diplomats, and envoys, marched from China to Persia to take revenge. Chinggis Khan led his army and wreaked havoc all over Persia. They obliterated Persian city after Persian city. This was done to make sure that no resistance was raised to challenge the Mongols in their rule over Persia.

            China, on the other hand, was conquered at two different times. Northern China was conquered before Chinggis Khan led his conquest on Persia, while Southern China was conquered by Chinggis Khan’s grandson, Khubilai Khan. The conquests in Northern China began with raids in 1211, and by 1220, the Mongols had the majority of Northern China under their control.

            At that time, Southern China was still under the control of the Song Dynasty. However, the Song capital at Hangzhou fell in 1276, and by 1279 all resistance to the Mongols throughout China had been defeated. Thus, Khubilai Khan dubbed himself emperor and created the Yuan Dynasty, which lasted for almost a century.

 

 

 

Focus Question #2

            To what extent did social structures in nomadic societies differ from settled peoples?

 

            Social structure in nomadic societies varied from those in settled communities in the way that nomadic social structure tended to be very simple while settled people’s social structure was generally more complex.

            Nomadic social structure was divided into two groups; noble and commoner. To become noble, you must win recognition as a leader, which allowed for nobles to organize tribal and clan alliances. Nomadic nobles, however, did not partake in affairs such as governing, because most tribes looked after themselves and preferred to not be interfered with. But in times of war, nobles possessed authority over forces and dealt harshly with those who did not obey.

            Nobility was frequently being gained and lost, because although it was inherited, it could be lost if the said noble was not performing at the appropriate level of leadership for the clans and tribes under their control.

            This differed from settled peoples in the ways that settled communities have more variety of occupations which allows for more social levels. A prime example of the complexity of settled communities’ social structure is that of the caste system in Hinduism. The caste system does not allow for people to move between the different castes – where you’re born, you stay for your entire life – and has more then just two different groups. Along with those groups, come sub-castes which make the system even more complex, creating a larger difference between nomadic social structure and that of settled peoples.