Was Genghis Khan's death the most single important turning point in world history.

[Deity Dude]

I watched a show on the History Channel that basically said Genghis Khan's "system" was unbeatable in it's era. It went on to say that, for the only time in European history, all of Europe united to fight a common foe. It said this battle took place in a city in Eastern Europe (Modern Day Poland). It said that "United Europe" lost the battle and Europe was defenseless after the battle. It went on to say right after the battle he died. Upon his death all of his troops worldwide were called home for his funeral and never came close again to the level they were at his death.

It also said that wherever he went his basic policy was to destrouy whatever "culture/society" existed. It said he particularily went out of his way to kill lawyers, doctors, merchants and basically any people that represented a non-nomadic society.

OK, I am not a Genghis Khan expert, but assuming this show was true, it seems to me his death could be considered the most important turning point in world history.

What if he hadn't died, and all of Europe had been "Mongolized"? What would have followed? Would there have been a Rennaisance? Would Christianity even exist? Modern Science.?

It seems that following his death a European (if not English) culture dominated the Earth. Basic, predominantly worldwide values that we take for granted today might not even exist.

I'm not talking about what languagge someone speaks or what food they eat but basic concepts of things as simple as "right and wrong" Permanent habitats vs nomadic life. etc.

I have no specific point other than the show, if true, really made me wonder how different the entire earth would be if that one single person hadn't died at that one specific time.

[Julian Delphiki]

I think you mean Ögedai Khan ? I've seen this speculated quite a few times and it probably is very meaningful event in history, but i dunno if it's really the most important one.

[LordShiva]

Re: Was Genghis Khan's death the most single important turning point in world history

Originally posted by Deity Dude
It also said that wherever he went his basic policy was to destrouy whatever "culture/society" existed. It said he particularily went out of his way to kill lawyers, doctors, merchants and basically any people that represented a non-nomadic society.

This is BS

[Deity Dude]

Well lilke I said I am certainly no Khan expert - just relating the show I saw.

[Deity Dude]

Originally posted by JulianD
I think you mean Ögedai Khan ? I've seen this speculated quite a few times and it probably is very meaningful event in history, but i dunno if it's really the most important one.

After following your link I think I got their 2 reigns combined into one in my head.

Thats what happens when you try and play Civ - listen to a hockey game and a baseball game and watch The History Channel all at the same time.

[Andemagne]

Originally posted by Deity Dude
Permanent habitats vs nomadic life.

Yeah, and there were the Americas. Incas and Aztecs would still have lived in one place.


History Channel
Civ
Ice Hockey Or Baseball

[Will9]

I thought Genghis was on his way to conquer Southern China when he died?

[Alexander I]

Originally posted by Will
I thought Genghis was on his way to conquer Southern China when he died?

Yes, it was Ögedei Khan who was poised to conquer Europe at the time of his demise.

[Deity Dude]

OK, well we've obviously proven I know so little about what I speculated, based on a TV show, might be the most important event in history that I got the name wrong.

So enlighten me - did the show overplay this event or was "western society/culture" that close to it's demise.

[BeechWell]

Considering that the Mongol rule pretty much remained episodic in Russia and the Islamic countries I doubt it would have completely changed our culture.
Christianity would certainly have survived, the Mongols were known for their religious tolerance (or lack of interest).
However I could imagine that the powers within Europe would have shifted. And maybe European and Middle Eastern cultures would have had more opportunities for cultural exchange, lessening tensions between the Catholic and Islamic world.

[Heraclitus]

I wonder how the Muslims would have reacted to infidels capturing Mekka? Also do you guys think the Mongols would have tolerated a pope? I think they might have decided to do away with the position, since it represented a center of power.

[Heresson]

Originally posted by Heraclitus
I wonder how the Muslims would have reacted to infidels capturing Mekka? Also do you guys think the Mongols would have tolerated a pope? I think they might have decided to do away with the position, since it represented a center of power.

They would've left the papacy exist. (Nestorian) christianity was quite popular among Mongols and related tribes at this time. In the Middle East, they were much more lenient towards christians than to muslims.

It went on to say that, for the only time in European history, all of Europe united to fight a common foe. It said this battle took place in a city in Eastern Europe (Modern Day Poland). It said that "United Europe" lost the battle and Europe was defenseless

The battle was next to Legnica city in Silesia, southern Poland. Prince Henry the Pius was killed, and, as he and his father have sort of re-united Poland around Silesia, Poland fell apart again.
But:
1) No, Europe was not united. There were just polish forces, with some western reinforcements, mostly from teutonic knights, which were obliged to support polish duchies. King of Bohemia, instead of coming, was aimlessly traveling with his army across his kingdom, out of fear probably.
2) the battle was close to being won by the Poles, actually. In Poland we all are forced to learn it in details, but I'll spare it to You.
Ergo, going further west would mean meating dozens of similar armies each with probability of success

3) These weren't main forces. Mongol army split in two. The main forces were led by Batu-Khan against Hungary, and conquered it. The rest was sent against polish duchies, as they were traditional allies of Hungary. Indeed, it is considered that they intended to stay in Hungary, but Batu moved east to be present at election of Great Khan. (Similarily Hulagu left Syria to be present at the election of Great Khan later on, which resulted in the loss of Ayn Galut battle)

[DaShi]

It's sad to see so much of history dictated by influencial individuals. Khan's death should not have ended his campaign but simply marked a stage in it. A pity he couldn't create a system that could survive without him.

[Spiffor]

Re: Was Genghis Khan's death the most single important turning point in world history

I'm not talking about what languagge someone speaks or what food they eat but basic concepts of things as simple as "right and wrong" Permanent habitats vs nomadic life. etc.

I have no specific point other than the show, if true, really made me wonder how different the entire earth would be if that one single person hadn't died at that one specific time.

Central Asia was largely mongolized, and the cities remained significant centers of power. Also, the Khanates in central Asia ended up converting to Islam. Besides, the Mongol empire in China was extremely influenced by Chinese culture.

Had Europe been invaded by the Mongols, I don't see why the pattern would have been different: warlike nomads conquer political power, become the dominant class, and are slowly assimilated into the stronger local culture. It's not as if such a scenario hadn't occured in Europe before...

[Sir Og]

What Spiffor said.
No reason to believe that a Mongolian conquest in Europe would somehow be different from what happened in China.