Did Mongol conquests have any positive side-effects, like some advances in culture or science?
It seems to me they were an extremely negative force in absolute terms, even if you take into account the period they were happening. Of course, I'm not that knowledgeable about this subject so I could be wrong.
IIRC They managed to make the Silk Road safer and cheaper to travel, though most people would probably choose to suffer multiple tolls and the possibility of bandits over a Mongol invasion
>>303861
The mongol occupation had a nice influence on persian miniatures that gave it it's characteristic "chinese" look.
Though they also rekt'd the country to the ground killing countless innocents and caused Timur, who did the same again, to exist. So yeah, it wasn't worth it.
They reopened the Silk Road.
They brought over technologies from China to Arab/Europe. Printing press is a direct result of such.
They also gave Europe the notice on the "outside" world like China again, thus fueling their exploration age.
>>303879
The trick here is that the Mongols took over the raids of the silk road, so what was once taken by force was given willingly as "taxes". During the period of the Mongol dominance, the Turkic people wouldn't dare raid the silk road.
Only trolls and people with a boner for freedom of religion/culture (IE people who don't understand successful empire building) consider the Mongol empire as anything except a remarkable feat of tributary collection and map painting.
>>303861
They brought gunpowder to Europe, aiding Europeans in their eternal quest to kill all Europeans.
Yes. Massive increase in Eurasian travel, trading and so on. Christians from Europe visited China, Indonesia, India and so on for the first time in centuries. There is some evidence that the Genoese had ships in the Indian Ocean in the 13th century because of this expansion.
Massive increase of interfaith dialogue. Catholics met Buddhists for the first time (William of Rubruck and so on) as well as regular contact between disparate religious sects separated for centuries (Nestorians and so on).
Mongols brought religious tolerance to minorities across Central Asia. This was pragmatic (divide and rule) realpolitik, but Jews, Christians were arguably better treated under many of the Khanates than they were under Islamic rule, so long as they weren't at first a majority, as in Georgia and the Rus.
War made men in the Middle East men again, which they had previously not been. Also led to a great increase in mysticism and poetry, because Shamanistic influences joined with existing Sufi practices to create syncretic beliefs that still exist in the Indian subcontinent today.
And 100 million+ dead.
It allowed the Polo family to travel back and forth from China and Marco Polo to tell his fantastic tale of this place to Europe.
Compare that with all the literature that was destroyed in the Mongol sack of Baghdad, the library of the world at the time, and the Tartar yoke institutionalized in Russia that probably handicaps Russia to this day in becoming a functioning society.
>>303889
Don't know what you're on about friend. Religious tolerance helped the Mongols. Appointing a Christian to rule over Muslims means he's going to be much more loyal to his paymasters than his subjects.
It also means you'll have enough sects praying that you're bound to get a line to the Real God eventually.
>>303886
>They reopened the Silk Road.
How was it even closed in the first place. All the Mongols did was destroy the already existing and lucrative trade through the central Middle East, dominated one across the steppes of modern day Russia and Central Asia, and sign trade deals advantageous to the Italians in the Black Sea.
The idea that they made the Silk Road better in any way is a myth. All that happened was that the Genoese and Venetians managed to take advantage of newcomers who didn't understand the value of the Black Sea trade and thus increased the profit margin of Italian traders in their ports.
Plus, let's not forget how the Black fucking Death came to Western Eurasia.
>>303897
Nobody believed Marco Polo at the time though. They thought he was crazy. The only one most people gave credence to was John of Plano Carpini.
>>303895
How did mongol culture survive if they fucking massacred everybody
>>303902
It was closed to Europeans before the Mongols. It reduced margins for the Kaffir merchants and thus stimulated trade. That's his point.
Plague spread cause Europe was fucking filthy as fuck.
They spread gunpowder out of China into the Middle East, from where it entered Europe. In the other direction, they brought the counterweight trebuchet to China. In Persia they influenced art a lot, though it tends to be exaggerated sometimes. The Mongols in Iran also patronized the great observatory at Maragheh where science flourished, though that hardly makes up for destroying Baghdad, plus they patronized some wonderful architecture and compiled one of the first true 'world histories', the Jami' al-tawarikh, which is really interesting for both its contents and its artwork.
They also opened up the Silk Road a bit more, but I don't think that really counts seeing as they destroyed most of the Silk Road's greatest cities.
>>303895
>Mongols brought religious tolerance to minorities across Central Asia
And then they converted to Islam, and turned on these minorities so hard that Christianity in Asia all but disappeared outside of small holdouts in Mesopotamia and Anatolia.
>>303904
Because everyone wanted to suck Mongol dick, believing they could convert the Mongols to their religion and thus slaughter their enemies. This is best typified by the illiterate Armenian monk Sergius in William of Rubruck's Itinerarium, who poisoned his superior in an attempt to get Mongke Khan 'to bow at our feet.'
The Mongol Court was like a modern Google Careers Day.
>>303906
>It was closed to Europeans before the Mongols
Which is bullshit, because the entire economy of the Kingdom of Jerusalem at Acre was based on a rich trade with the East.
By the way, it was the Mongol Invasions of Iran and Iraq that destroyed this trade, cutting the yearly income of Acre several times until it had no more economic links with Syria to convince the Mamluk regime to hold off on conquering it finally.
>>303910
They didn't 'convert' as soon as you think though. Guyuk was sometimes a Muslim, other times a Buddhist, then a Nestorian, and then a Muslim again. All while sucking Tengri's toes.
>>303915
Well come on. I never said they didn't trade. But don't tell me Joe from Suffolk was travelling to Nippon to buy silks before the Mongol invasions. Mongols cut out the middlemen, literally.
>>303916
Which matters how? I didn't make any argument about how slow or fast they converted. I was pointing out that before the Mongols, the Middle East and Central Asia had a huge Christian population, and that it was under the Mongol successors that this community nearly vanished.
But hey! At least Giovanni got to make 15% more profits than usual!
>>303925
Joe from Suffolk got his silk from Italy or Syria or Byzantium like everyone else in Europe before the Mongols. The Black Sea trade wasn't about silk and porcelain, it was about grain and slaves.
>>303897
>Compare that with all the literature that was destroyed in the Mongol sack of Baghdad, the library of the world at the time, and the Tartar yoke institutionalized in Russia that probably handicaps Russia to this day in becoming a functioning society.
>>303930
All those silk farms in Italy and Syria and Greece huh...
>>303940
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantine_silk
>>303861
As far as I know reading a book about Genghis Khan, he helped integrate Asia internally politically and economically, and connect Asia to Europe more through trade, both of which are certainly great thing.
