Historical myths

[Incongruous]

Some people actually think that Lenin and his Bolsheviks were great people, jesus, that make me collapse all the time.

[Soulforged]

Some people actually think that Lenin and his Bolsheviks were great people, jesus, that make me collapse all the time.

Maybe not ("but no one is free from sin"), they were just humans. But that leads me to another myth: that the "Communist" Soviet Union was actually communist, and that communism is a bad thing and should be banned (following the words of that great demagogue: JFK). Besides Lenin didn't interprete well the theories of communism (of Marx and Engels), the Bolsheviks should have been trained and educated people with a general idea of politics, socialism and with an undertanding of government, they were far from this, that allowed Stalin to control them like sheeps, and with the death of Lenin all fell down.

[Meneldil]

Statement or myth?

Since we are in the Historical Myths topic, I'll let you guess

But yeah, I'm currently reading 'Le devisement du Monde' (Marco Polo's travel to the East, don't know the english name sorry), and apart from the fact he's really biased toward Muslims (he hates them) and 'Tartars', as he calls the Mongols (he loves them), we can see how the common view of the Mongols in the Western world is screwed up. Marco Polo speaks about all the cities they destroyed, he explains how they wipped out Persia, how Cingis killed the christian 'King Jean' and how Kubilai killed his possibly christian uncle, but he also speaks about all the huge cities they built, the Yasa, their civilised customs, their wonderful palaces, etc.

As for burning whole cities and killing all survivors, I know a few european lords who did the samein France, Germany, though not on the same scale.

[Kraxis]

It is not killing the entire population, or even the destruction of cities. But the way it was done.

Almost always tere were some that somehow managed to survive. Hiding, fleeing, whatever, but in any case they survive. The Mongols wanted to get those too, where most others were satisfied with the destruction of the city. Sending back a patrol after a few days is a very effective way of dealing with the survivors, but to what end? The point has already been made, the few hundred survivors (if that many) are of no consequence.

And the absolute destruction of a city is also very much beyond what others did. Sure, they burned cities, but ripping it to pieces, and taking the time to plough over the land afterwards, well that is in my mind too much (well it all is really). Again no need for it, their point had been made. Would people be more scared because of it? Doubt it, chances are that they would die to a normal sack anyway.

[Steppe Merc]

I am sceptical about how many cities were truly destroyed. Some probably were, and I trust Muslim sources far more than I do Western ones, but even so contemporary historians tend to exagerate, especially when it comes to the people of the steppe.

[cunctator]

Roman republican cavalry was of poor quality.

[Steppe Merc]

Heh. Well it was compared to the best cavalry.

[cunctator]

Yes, as well as many others.