They perceived threats to security; this led to war and then increased the length of border. The difference between their expansions was that Imperial Rome built its army from citizen-farmers, due to the conquest Rome had many slaves. Han Chine had a military at their disposal to enlarge the empire. Han China had conquered many lands but unlike Imperial Rome, Han China did not have slaves as a result of their growing territory. In order to work in the office of Imperial Rome he had to serve 10 years as a solider; while, Han China picked the upper class through the family.
However, despite all of these accommodations, Mongol rule was exploitative and harsh. The Russian invasion began in a similar way to that of China, with ferocity and devastation. As the Mongols passed through a developing Russia, though, they deemed that it had little to offer, and they began to rule over it from the steppes. In Russia, although the Mongols ruled over Kievan Rus, their control was much less involved than in China. However, contrary to the total Mongolian occupation and authority over China,
After Old Major died, Napoleon changed the rules so they reflected well on him, and gave him the freedom to do what he liked, whereas he left the other animals with no food, and no time to rest and continued to make them work while he sat back and did nothing. Comparison In George Orwell’s ‘Animal Farm’, the majority of the animals were used to represent some of the main characters in the Russian Revolution. For example I am using Joseph Stalin. I think that Joseph Stalin was very similar to Napoleon. There are many similarities such as the actions they put forward and their characteristics.
Document 2, which was written by monks near Russia, shows us the Mongol movement into Ryazan. At first the Mongols were faced with much resistance but they still tried to compromise with the locals. When the locals refused to give them tribute and instead sent a request for help, the Mongols immediately went to their town and slaughtered everyone there. This was a smart strategy on the part of the Mongols, they knew is they installed fear that the next town or city they conquered would not want to fight if it meant they risked the annihilation of their culture and people. Mongol military
It was of their special usage of military strategies and weapon that allow the Mongolians to conquer over 4 million square miles of land more than that of Alexander the Great, Tamerlane, or Cyrus the Great (Doc.1). The way the Mongols slay almost all inhabitants in an area doesn’t mean that they are entirely barbaric, what it really shows is how advance the Mongolians are in their military knowledge, knowing by killing most inhabitants they can prevent future rebellions and drive fear in the remaining inhabitants to further reduce the chances of a rebellions (Doc.4). Seen by John of Plano Caripini was how the Mongolians organize and set rules for their armies. The Mongolians organize the army in a way that there are different levels of captain ruling over a certain number of people, doing this makes the army easier to control and organize. In battles those who ran away, don’t follow and fight, or
The traumatic experiences from the previous war meant that more people became pacifists and consequently a greater number applied for exemption (over 50,000) and this time all but 12,000 were given exemption. In addition, conscientious objectors had shown that they were not cowards by working dangerous jobs such as bomb disposal and ambulance drivers. They displayed bravery and commitment without actually working in the trenches and so the government was prepared to treat them better. Public attitudes towards absolutists were still hostile but alternativists were
The Reds controlled high industry areas which allowed them to stop the enemy receiving supplies as well as supplying the Bolshevik army with plenty of munitions. Another key point as to why the Reds won is that the army was controlled by Trotsky who organised it in a very strict, but effective way. The Whites however, were inefficient, lacked unity within their army and therefore fought as separate detachments; they lacked a true leader and were too dependent on supplies from abroad, which rarely arrived with sufficient quantities or in the right location. In short, the Whites were unlikely to ever destroy the Reds exceptional army due to their many weaknesses in comparison to the Reds strengths. Source A would agree with the idea that the Whites were weak, which is why the Reds won the civil war.
To show their submission, some towns offered food and provisions to the Mongols, and in exchange, Khan's force guaranteed them protection. In cities where the Mongols were forced to conquer by force, Khan divided the survivors by profession and drafted the few who were literate and anyone who could speak various languages. Those who had been the city's most rich and powerful were killed instantly. Khan and his army pushed further and further into the empire. The caliph in Baghdad was hostile toward the sultan and supported Genghis Khan, sending him a
The Shah would check on the honesty of his subject by going to the street markets in disguise similarly to the Sultan of the Ottoman Empire. The power of the Shah was created by establishing a permanent, paid army of his own, made up mainly of prisoners from the Caucasus, to avoid having to rely on Qizilbash military support in every Safavid campaign. The emperor of the Mughal Empire was an autocrat. He had a council of ministers to consult with, but was not bound by their word. The emperor was the center of
This means that “when they are in battle, if one or two or three or even more out of a group of ten run away, all are put to death.” The Mongols take loyalty very seriously and if someone does not fight with them, that means that person is fighting against them. Document 3 describes the attack of the lawless ones, the Mongols. The narrator chronicles how the Mongols “took the town and set it on fire” and the perishing people, “some by fire and others by sword”. The motives of the Mongols were not clearly expressed in this document, but it does show the severe and merciless nature of the Mongols. Document 5 comes from the point of view of someone who is analyzing the ruthlessness of the Mongols and their conquest of Russia, which lead to the deaths of many.