December 7, 2012 1:30 pm
Climate Change May Have Driven Genghis Khan’s Army Across Eurasia
The rise of the Mongol Empire at the hands of Genghis Khan in the early 1200s was a cultural and military expansion that forever changed the social (and even genetic) landscape of Eurasia. Playing an important role in Khan’s successes were the sturdy Mongol horses, the use of which “gave the Mongols the decided tactical advantage of mobility in conflicts against sedentary civilizations.”
New research, says The Economist, suggests that contributing to the Mongols’ massive expansion was a transient, decades-long blip in the climate—a shift that brought warm temperatures and abundant rain to the pastures on which the Mongol’s horses grazed. The new research, by Amy Hessl and Neil Pederson, suggests that the changing climate conditions boosted plant growth, which provided more food for horses, and in turn boosted their viability in battle.
Historians and archaeologists have often argued that climate plays a role in the decline and fall of nations and empires, from the collapse of the eastern-Mediterranean bronze age, via the end of the Maya city-states of Central America, to the revolution that destroyed France’s ancien regime. To link it to the rise of an empire is more unusual, and raises fascinating questions about the degree to which history can be enriched by the study of things such as the supply of available energy. It is even possible that a better understanding of Mongolia’s past climate may help Genghis’s descendants as they try to cope with the striking changes of the present.
More from Smithsonian.com:
Genghis Khan’s Treasures
People Wear Pants Because Cavalry Won Wars
Sign up for our free email newsletter and receive the best stories from Smithsonian.com each week.
6 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
In “My Big Fat Greek Wedding”, the father plays a game where he can prove that any word in any language can always be traced by convoluted logic to an origin in Greek.
Sort of the same game greens play connecting any dot you can think of to Climate Change.
Well, at least Genghis Kahn’s conquests can’t be blamed on the misguided policies of the Bush administration.
But if you think about it…
Comment by John — December 7, 2012 @ 3:15 pm
Well John as a lib you just had to tow MSNBC company line and throw Mr. Bush in there instead of having something intelligent to say.
Comment by Get a grip — December 8, 2012 @ 7:01 am
@ John: Your post demonstrates an ability to connect any subject to a political position. What are you doing posting on a science article if you don’t believe in science?
Your Bush admin. strawman isn’t something anyone I know has ever asserted. More that it’s been 200 years worth of industrial age activity that has had an effect on the climate.
But on this subject, (stay with us John), they’re talking about a possible change in climate 1200 years ago. One not caused by humans. You’d think that would make you happy since most of the arguments that anti-science people is not there isn’t a change in climate currently, but that it’s a natural cyclical event that humans aren’t responsible for. See? I just made your argument for you even though it’s not my belief. You’re welcome!
Unless you were stating that climate change doesn’t effect the environment and\or the people living in it. I can’t help you with that jump in logic.
I was drawn to the story more because of the historical aspect of the Mongols. No one can deny the power of their cavalry to change the world in that time period. Anything that would have helped horses thrive would have been an enormous benefit to them. Therefore, “if” there’s validity in the hypotenuse of the article, climate change would have indeed had a major effect on human history.
Comment by Mike B. — December 9, 2012 @ 12:32 am
Climate Science “proof” (stay with me Mike):
“99% of climate scientists agree…”
99% of scientists agreed that Isaac Newton had the last word on physics. That is, until Einstein proved that wasn’t the case at all. Science isn’t a popularity contest. It progresses by way of skepticism and open-mindedness, continual research and a realization that extremely complex questions are never settled.
“Climate Change skeptics are the same as (Holocaust) deniers.”
That’s a pretty scientific analysis. In other words, let’s burn the heretics.
“Climate Change deniers are as ignorant as those who believe the Earth is flat.”
The general shape of the Earth is an easy scientific question to answer: take a picture from space. The components determining atmospheric conditions, especially 100 years from now, are not subject to an easy answer. To conflate the two scientific questions indicates the scientific ignorance of Climate Change believers.
“The majority of peer reviewed recearch shows…”
What a surprise. If a climate researcher questions the dogma he is denied funding, publically ridiculed as the evil equivalent of a Holocaust denier or ignorant cousin of a flat Earther, and has his career stopped dead in it’s tracks. Facing that career prospect is it any wonder that the vast majority of climate scientists and their journal peers demonstrate agreement?
“If it’s unusually hot, blame it on Global Warming. If it’s unusually cold, blame it on Climate Change.”
In other words, what atmospheric condition CANNOT be pegged to Climate Change? Very scientific.
Is climate changing? Maybe. Are humans the primary cause? Maybe. How can we quantify either in an accurate way? Who knows? The problem is that this area of science has become so distorted by left wing politial pressure that the research is extremely questionable. It’s degenerated from real science to pseudo-science or, among its most scientifically ignorant adherents, Global Warming Religon.
The loudest voices pushing Climate Change dogma are the ones with the least scientific education. It is their religon. Their logic is as unscientific and their venom is as extremem as ony other type of religious fanatic.
As someone with a doctorate in a hard experimantal science, I’d like to know what the answer to this question is. But the actual scientific process has become so polluted that at this point it’s virtually impossible.
Comment by John — December 10, 2012 @ 9:53 am
@John….Did we even read the same M*th*rF*ck*ng article?!
You know, about Genghis Khan, the Mongols, the importance of cavalry and what a temporary change in climate might have meant to an army dependent on the horse 800 fricken years ago?
Go over to HuffPo if you just want to practice your right-wing troll tactics. Your wall of text has not one thing to do with the article posted or my first response.
Comment by Mike B. — December 11, 2012 @ 2:17 am
Obviously, Global Warming is affecting your mental state.
Switch to de-caf. But better save up because:
December 10, 2012 “Start Hoarding Your Beans, Thanks to Climate Change, $7 Coffee May Be the Norm”
Global Warming, excuse me – Climate Change – apocalypse du jour
Comment by John — December 11, 2012 @ 9:47 am