462

submitted 3 months ago by reallykindasorta@slrpnk.net to c/science_memes@mander.xyz

50 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] TrousersMcPants@lemmy.world 38 points 3 months ago

I find it interesting how the Mongolian empire has kind of taken a 180 in its historical image. Not long ago they were viewed as just cartoon villains that destroyed everything. But now you see so many people talking about some of the "good" aspects that it almost makes them seem strangely benevolent.

The reality of course was that they were an empire, and like all empires they steamrolled and destroyed anything that stood in their way while taking advantage of anything that furthered their goals. They probably killed far more people than they helped if you asked anyone living through the time.

Dan Carlin's podcast, Hardcore History, has a series called Wrath of the Khans where he talks about this in length and it's very interesting to think about.

[-] Skullgrid@lemmy.world 24 points 3 months ago

from my understanding , it's a chain of

You see that village over there? they resisted. we burnt everything , killed every man and child, and raped all the women.

See the other village over there? they joined us, and we gave them access to goods from across the world, the latest technology and treat them better than their previous rulers.

Your choice.

[-] drosophila 22 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

When people think about Rome they usually imagine the roads and the aquaducts and not so much the crucifixions and the slavery.

[-] mnemonicmonkeys@sh.itjust.works 11 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Yeah, the Mongolians front-loaded most of their atrocities. Rome was more of a slow burn

[-] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 8 points 3 months ago

Rome was both. The mongols raped and slaughtered. The Romans were too civilized to do that as much, instead they just enslaved some of your village so they could die in the mines or fields or construction projects. And then there’s the internal atrocities. Rome had three servile wars and then without easing up even a bit never had another.

The Kahns were more like the Shahs, conqueror emperors seeking to hold the great titles of the world like emperor of China or pharaoh and in doing so became one. The Romans were like America “we’re different snd our own thing” before being a different kind of brutal

[-] TrousersMcPants@lemmy.world 5 points 3 months ago

Well, they might imagine one specific crucifixion

[-] drosophila 6 points 3 months ago

Strangely enough I feel like that crucification isn't much associated with the Romans. Even though the Romans were the ones who carried it out Judas gets almost 100% of the ire.

Even Jews are given more blame by antisemitic Christians. Like, no one is starting up a pogrom against Italians because their great great great grandpa might've been the guy who stabbed Jesus in the ribs.

[-] Shard@lemmy.world 4 points 3 months ago

Theologically, all mankind was to blame because of their sins.

But it's far easier to blame a minority and it had the added benefit of pushing whatever agenda the ruling class had.

[-] TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago

I think I read somewhere that in order for the Romans to abnegate their role in killing Jesus, as they transitioned to Christianity, they scapegoated the Jews. Although, it was the people who demanded to crucify Jesus. But of course, anti-semites focused on the ethnicity, instead just ascribing the mob justice to just-- on people.

My guess is that because Jews reject the divinity of Jesus, the Christians found it fair to oppress the Jews. It is not different though to the crusading missions of later Christians in the medieval Europe. The non-Christians refuse to recognise Jesus Christ as both the son of God and god himself, the either they convert, or else be killed or ostracised.