Batu Khan (c. 1205 – 1255) was a Mongol ruler and the founder of the Blue Horde. Batu was a son of Jochi and grandson of Genghis Khan. His Blue Horde became the Golden Horde (or Kipchak Khanate), which ruled Rusand the Caucasus for around 250 years, after also destroying the armies of Poland and Hungary. He was the nominal leader of the Mongol invasion of Europe, although his general, Subutai is credited with masterminding strategy. After gaining control of Rus, Volga Bulgaria and the Crimea he invaded Europe winning the Battle of Mohi against Béla IV of Hungary on April 11, 1241. In 1246, he returned to Mongolia for the election of the new Great Khan, perhaps hoping to be a candidate. When his rival, Guyuk Khan became Great Khan, he returned to his khanate and built his capital at Sarai on the Volga. Known as Saria Batu, this remained the capital of the Golden Horde until it collapsed.
Batu's Khan's role in the Russian and European campaigns is sometimes downplayed due to the role played by his general. However, it is to Batu Khan's credit that he listened to his general's counsel, putting his long experience in the field to good use. Perhaps the most significant aspect of Batu Khan's legacy and of the Mongol invasion of Europe was that it helped to draw Europe's attention to the world beyond the European space. As long as the Mongol Empire itself lasted, the Silk Road was protected and secure, open for travel by diplomats such as the Papal Nuncio who attended the 1246 Assembly as well as for trade. To some extent, the Mongol Empire and the Mongol invasion of Europe, of which Batu Khan was at least nominally in charge, served as a bridge between different cultural worlds."
The above information cited from New World Encyclopdia.
Batu Khan, a grandson of Genghis Khan was truly a visionary and explorer of The Unknown.
Batu Khan went beyond the known boundary of the Turko-Mongol tribes in Mongolia, Manchuria, Siberia and Northern China to explore the mysterious and unknown lands of Western Europe, Russia, Hungary, Germany and Poland. Even though his brilliant general Subotai was credited in winning the battles during the European campaigns, but it was due to Batu's vision, will and determination to move into these different unknown territories despite the great danger of being defeated and overwhelmed by the enemies.
The one central idea I want to emphasize to us Overseas Chinese, be it first, second, third,................generations is this similar desire to go beyond from the known, China to the vast unknown lands, such as America, Canada, Mexico, Cuba, Carribean Islands, Central America, Brazil, Argentina, Western Europe, Russia and Eastern Europe, Africa, north and south of the Sahara, Union of South Africa, Madagasca, India, Siri Lanka, Pakistan, Thailand, Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, Myanma, South Korean, Japan, Malaysia, Indonesia, Singapore, Australia, the Pacific Islands and so on.
All of us, the so called Overseas Chinese once arrive in the different unknown lands had to try to survive in a new environment, culturally, ligustically, customs, habits, living among different races, colors, religions, creeds. Each of us had to "fight" for a space to breath and survive , persist, learn and grow.
Just like Batu Khan in his days of conquest, he had to face up to all the challenges, big and small, impersonal and personal in order to survive and grow.
ALL OF US OVERSEAS CHINESE, EACH AND EVERYONE OF US ARE CONSTANTLY FIGHTING TO CONQUER A LIVING SPACE IN A STRANGE LAND FULL OF DIFFICULTIES AND CHALLENGES.
RISE UP, ALL OF YOU WITH THE BATU SPIRIT TO FIGHT AND GROW TO BETTER OURSELVES AND OUR FAMILIES. WE ARE ALL CONQUERORS JUST LIKE BATU KHAN IN THE PAST!
Please comment.
domingo, 28 de fevereiro de 2010
My very first impression when entering into the American Territory
I took a cargo ship to go from Santo, Brazil to New York to study in 1960.
I met on board an Italian journalist from Luca and we became friendly. Since he had been to America several times, I therefore asked him about the racial situation in America and whether I, being an Asian would be given equal treatments there.
I still remembered him telling me that it was the blacks who were treated badly, but as an Asian I should have no problems.
At the same time I made friend with a black American sailor in his fifties. He was very friendly and told me a lot about things in Americaç; I really enjoyed speaking with him.
Then when we entered the harbor in Charleston, South Carolina(or North CArolina?), I confronted the first tough attitude from an Immigaration Officer who came on board to check the passengers.
I was called upon to speak with him, he was someone in his fifties, with a very pale red face, spoke with a Southern drawal. When I told him I was going to college in Adrian, Michigan, he immediately told me that I could not leave the ship.
Then I saw the first helping attitude from the Americans (of which I would come accross many times in America later on), a ship officer sitting at the table argued with the Immigation Officer by saying that since very few people will be on board therefore I should go on shore and do some sightseeing and then return to boat.
Finally the Immigration Officer backed down and allowed me to go for a sightseeing on shore.
It was the very first time I came to face a tough Immigration Officer and a very helpful ship officer from the USA.
I welcome comments and opinions from others.
I met on board an Italian journalist from Luca and we became friendly. Since he had been to America several times, I therefore asked him about the racial situation in America and whether I, being an Asian would be given equal treatments there.
I still remembered him telling me that it was the blacks who were treated badly, but as an Asian I should have no problems.
At the same time I made friend with a black American sailor in his fifties. He was very friendly and told me a lot about things in Americaç; I really enjoyed speaking with him.
Then when we entered the harbor in Charleston, South Carolina(or North CArolina?), I confronted the first tough attitude from an Immigaration Officer who came on board to check the passengers.
I was called upon to speak with him, he was someone in his fifties, with a very pale red face, spoke with a Southern drawal. When I told him I was going to college in Adrian, Michigan, he immediately told me that I could not leave the ship.
Then I saw the first helping attitude from the Americans (of which I would come accross many times in America later on), a ship officer sitting at the table argued with the Immigation Officer by saying that since very few people will be on board therefore I should go on shore and do some sightseeing and then return to boat.
Finally the Immigration Officer backed down and allowed me to go for a sightseeing on shore.
It was the very first time I came to face a tough Immigration Officer and a very helpful ship officer from the USA.
I welcome comments and opinions from others.
terça-feira, 16 de fevereiro de 2010
An Overseas Chinese's view regarding the Mongol General Subotai
The man who led these invasions in Russia, Hungary, Leinitz and all the major battles fought in Korea, China, Persia and Central Asia, Subotai Bagatur (1175-1248), or Subotai the Valiant, was one of history's greatest generals, demonstrably the equal of Hannibal and Scipio in tactical brilliance and perhaps of Alexander and Caesar in strategy. With his conquest of Hungary, he destroyed every European military force of consequence standing between the Mongols and Western Europe. Still almost unknown in the West for the strategist and tactical genius he was, Subotai inspired the modern military emphases on speed, maneuver, surprise, envelopment, deep battle and battles of annihilation."
The following paragraph would demonstrate that after the defeat of the Hungarians, the whole of Western laid open defenseless against the Mongol army. If the Mongol had continued their advances and campaings into Western Europe, it is safely to assume that the principal cities of Western Europe would have been conquered by the Mongols.
However, due to Mongol traditions, with the death of Ogedai Khan, Genghis Khan's third son, all the Mongol royal family members would have to return to Mongolia despite of whatever battles they were engaging at that moment.
Therefore, Western Europe was saved from the Mongol conquest, but Batu Khan consolidated his conquest of Russia and ruled it (although indirectly for close to three centuries).
"The Mongols were preparing to attack Vienna when a messenger arrived with the news that Ogedai Khan had died. Mongol law required all royal offspring to return to the capital in Karakorum to take part in the election of a new khan. Subotai's army had three royal princes with it. The Mongol columns turned east and began the long march back to Mongolia. Their route took them through Dalmatia and Serbia and across northern Bulgaria. They laid waste to these lands before vanishing across the lower Danube, never to return to Europe. In Russia, the Mongols established their own state, the Golden Horde of Batu Khan, and ruled the country for nearly three centuries."
Subotai was 68 when he returned from the long campaign against Russia and Hungary. He died at age 73, but his tactical and strategic legacy lived on. Two Russians, Lt Gen. Mikhail I. Ivanin (1801-1874) who wrote an analysis of Mongol tactics and in 1924, Mikhail Frunze, the deputy people's commissar for Military and Naval Affairs, introduced the concept of "deep battle", which mandates widespread seizure of the offensive by conducting long-range attacks against enemy troop concentrations, road junctions, communications, cities and supply depots, thus paralyzing his ability to concentrate in force and forcing him to retreat rather than act. This was, truly, the Mongol strategic theory of War.
The Russian emphasis on surprise, maneuver over long distances, maintaining the offensive and striking the enemy in depth at multiple points has its origins in the Mongol experience, as does the Russian reliance on mobility, maneuver, encirclement and annihilation of the enemy wherever he can be brought to battle.
By 1937 the Russians had--in a doctrinal and tactical sense--essentially reinvented the Mongol army with modern equipment. The Red Army was the largest and most mechanized army in the world, and its commanders were better trained in the operational control of large units over great distances than those of any officer corps in the West. Frunze and Tukhachevsky, both students of Ivanin's analysis of the Mongol campaigns, had reconfigured the Russian army in the image of the armies of Genghis Khan and Subotai.
The following are the Innovations introduced by the Mongols in warfare.
By the time Subotai died in 1248, he'd conquered 32 nations and won 65 battles. His successes rested largely on the Mongols' innovative style of warfare, with emphases on speed, maneuver and surprise.
Speed: The Mongol army, organized in units of 10, 100, 1,000 and 10,000 called a touman, was almost entirely cavalry (40 percent heavy, 60 light). Each soldier had three or four mounts--swift, durable Przewalsky horses that could forage in winter. A touman might cover hundreds of miles in a few days.
Maneuver: The army advanced in widely separated columns, communicating via couriers. When an enemy was located, columns coalesced and struck simultaneously from several directions, even from the rear. Typically, light mounted archers charged first, followed by the shock of heavy cavalry.
Surprise: Mongol army units worked to conceal their numbers, locations and intentions, encircling enemies and feigning retreats to ser up ambushes.
By using Intimidation
An important precept of Mongol warfare was the battle of annihilation. The Mongols equated "victory" with the utter destruction of enemies.
Capture or Kill: When attacking an enemy stronghold, Mongols captured young men to serve in their army and slaughtered all others. Pragmatically, this was done to crush any threat to their lines of communication and to demoralize other potential enemies.
Divide and Conquer: Destroying enemy cities in rapid succession-as they did in northern Russia in 1238, sacking 12 walled towns in 60 days---the Mongols reduced their risk of facing coalition armies.
Leave No Garrison: Slaughtering inhabitants of conquered cities meant the Mongols did not have to divide their army and garrison soldiers.
Pursue to Death: The Mongols ruthlessly harried enemy leaders not slain in battle, to prevent them from serving as rallying points for opposition.
By 1937 the Russians had--in a doctrinal and tactical sense--essentially reinvented the Mongol army with modern equipment. The Red Army was the largest and most mechanized army in the world, and its commanders were better trained in the operational control of large units over great distances than those of any officer corps in the West. Frunze and Tukhachevsky, both students of Ivanin's analysis of the Mongol campaigns, had reconfigured the Russian army in the image of the armies of Genghis Khan and Subotai.
The following are the Innovations introduced by the Mongols in warfare.
By the time Subotai died in 1248, he'd conquered 32 nations and won 65 battles. His successes rested largely on the Mongols' innovative style of warfare, with emphases on speed, maneuver and surprise.
Speed: The Mongol army, organized in units of 10, 100, 1,000 and 10,000 called a touman, was almost entirely cavalry (40 percent heavy, 60 light). Each soldier had three or four mounts--swift, durable Przewalsky horses that could forage in winter. A touman might cover hundreds of miles in a few days.
Maneuver: The army advanced in widely separated columns, communicating via couriers. When an enemy was located, columns coalesced and struck simultaneously from several directions, even from the rear. Typically, light mounted archers charged first, followed by the shock of heavy cavalry.
Surprise: Mongol army units worked to conceal their numbers, locations and intentions, encircling enemies and feigning retreats to ser up ambushes.
By using Intimidation
An important precept of Mongol warfare was the battle of annihilation. The Mongols equated "victory" with the utter destruction of enemies.
Capture or Kill: When attacking an enemy stronghold, Mongols captured young men to serve in their army and slaughtered all others. Pragmatically, this was done to crush any threat to their lines of communication and to demoralize other potential enemies.
Divide and Conquer: Destroying enemy cities in rapid succession-as they did in northern Russia in 1238, sacking 12 walled towns in 60 days---the Mongols reduced their risk of facing coalition armies.
Leave No Garrison: Slaughtering inhabitants of conquered cities meant the Mongols did not have to divide their army and garrison soldiers.
Pursue to Death: The Mongols ruthlessly harried enemy leaders not slain in battle, to prevent them from serving as rallying points for opposition.
From the above information, we can see that what the Mongol army employed so successfully in the 13th Century against Asia and Europe were actually unique methods of warfare unfamiliar to the civilized world at large.
Therefore, their battle field successes were actually the results that the Mongols had employed a system of superior tactics and strategy in war which were not known or practiced to perfection by the Mongols.
BEING AN OVERSEAS CHINESE, I am deeply impressed by the ancient Mongol methods of waging war, because we all can emulate and learn from the Mongol Mindset to do the following:
By emigrating to strange countries in our world today, we, as Overseas chinese must devise new ways to imporve our livelihood, such as learning, working, mingling with other races, to get into the mainstream in each of the countries we reside and trying to be Good Citizens.
However, it is not enough to just work hard, study hard, and try to be accepte by the mainstream of the population.
We Overseas Chinese must also try to innovate in the methods in doing things, try to find opportunities to compete with the mainstream and be recognized as not average, but outstanding citizens, be it in business, arts, science, law, politics, agriculture, education, computer sceince, sports, mathematics, economics and etc.
Just like the Mongols employed in their superior and super effective military tactics and strategy in waging war, WE OVERSEAS CHINESE SHOULD ALSO STRIFE TO FIND WAYS AND MEANS TO NOT ONLY EQUAL TO THE MASSES, BUT TRY TO STAND OUT AND ABOVE THE MASSES.
OUR MOTTO MUST BE TO TYR HARD, CONTINUOUSLY, RELENTLESSLY, NEVER GIVE UP, AND NEVER GIVE IN TO BE A BETTER CITIZEN, BETTER STUDENT, BETTER BUSINESSMAN, BETTER WORKER, BETTER LAWYER, BETTER POLITICIAN, BETTER DOCTOR IN ORDER TO SERVE OTHERS AND ALSO TO FEEL PROUD WE HAVE DONE OUR VERY BEST IN THE NEW COUNTRIES WE HAVE CHOSEN TO SETTLE AND PROSPER.
sexta-feira, 12 de fevereiro de 2010
An Overseas Chinese's Interpretation of Chinese History
Being an Overseas Chinese who has lived in China, Hong Kong, Taipei, Japan, Brazil, USA and travelled several times throughout the whole world (with the exception of Australia, parts of Africa, Eastern Europe and Cenral Asia).
After reading Chinese, Medieval European History, and history of the world in the past 200 years, being a layman, not a trained historian by any means, the author comes to the following eye-opening conclusion:
Chinese history from past to present running over 4000 years seems to point to one remarkable repetiton:
The constant invasions by the nomadic tribes-including all the Turco-Mongol tribes from Mongolia, Manturia, Siberia and parts of North China into Han Chinese cultural dynasties always ended up by the partial or total assimilation of these Turco - Mongol tribes by the Han Chinese.
However, the cycle of invasion, domination, cultural assimilation of all these nomadic tribes had actually made the Chinese nation more powerful, more energetic and with greater expansion of territories.
Just to name a few, The Yuan Dynasty, The Quing Dynasty, The Tang Dynasty, The Norther Wei Dynasty, The Jin Dynasty, and many others in the past and recent Chinese history.
The most strikikng characteritics emerged after a careful reading and examination of these dynasties seem to point to the simultaneous existance of two Chinas, The Inner Han China with its conservative, less aggresive and inward looking tendencies versus the evern conquering, warlike, and dominating Outer China composed of these Turco-Mongol tribes.
Throughout Chinese history, the Inner and Outer China feeds on each other to grow, to expand and to conserve the Chinese cultural values on a continuous and never ending dynamic basis.
The reason China has a continuous history without ever be cut off by any other civilization points to the continuous and never ending inter-reaction of Outer China and Inner China.
No other country in the world has a similar pattern of such on going, continuous and never ending inter-reaction of Outer China invades Inner China, dominates it for sometime, then the partially aculturized Turco Mongol tribes would be absorbed by the Inner Chinese culture, then the Outer China nomadic tribes would rise up again to invade , dominate parts of China. The whole cycle of invasion-domination, assimilation and fresh invasion-domination and assimilation would repeat itself again and again.
This Inner And Outer China phenomenon is unique to the Chinese nation and it seems to me due to this continuous inter-reaction of the two have really kept China going forward.
I welcome comments and opinions
After reading Chinese, Medieval European History, and history of the world in the past 200 years, being a layman, not a trained historian by any means, the author comes to the following eye-opening conclusion:
Chinese history from past to present running over 4000 years seems to point to one remarkable repetiton:
The constant invasions by the nomadic tribes-including all the Turco-Mongol tribes from Mongolia, Manturia, Siberia and parts of North China into Han Chinese cultural dynasties always ended up by the partial or total assimilation of these Turco - Mongol tribes by the Han Chinese.
However, the cycle of invasion, domination, cultural assimilation of all these nomadic tribes had actually made the Chinese nation more powerful, more energetic and with greater expansion of territories.
Just to name a few, The Yuan Dynasty, The Quing Dynasty, The Tang Dynasty, The Norther Wei Dynasty, The Jin Dynasty, and many others in the past and recent Chinese history.
The most strikikng characteritics emerged after a careful reading and examination of these dynasties seem to point to the simultaneous existance of two Chinas, The Inner Han China with its conservative, less aggresive and inward looking tendencies versus the evern conquering, warlike, and dominating Outer China composed of these Turco-Mongol tribes.
Throughout Chinese history, the Inner and Outer China feeds on each other to grow, to expand and to conserve the Chinese cultural values on a continuous and never ending dynamic basis.
The reason China has a continuous history without ever be cut off by any other civilization points to the continuous and never ending inter-reaction of Outer China and Inner China.
No other country in the world has a similar pattern of such on going, continuous and never ending inter-reaction of Outer China invades Inner China, dominates it for sometime, then the partially aculturized Turco Mongol tribes would be absorbed by the Inner Chinese culture, then the Outer China nomadic tribes would rise up again to invade , dominate parts of China. The whole cycle of invasion-domination, assimilation and fresh invasion-domination and assimilation would repeat itself again and again.
This Inner And Outer China phenomenon is unique to the Chinese nation and it seems to me due to this continuous inter-reaction of the two have really kept China going forward.
I welcome comments and opinions
Assinar:
Postagens (Atom)
