Eva, I didn't mean to suggest genetically based aggressiveness, nor did the Russian professor I referred to. Why it occurred is something of a mystery (to me at least - though perhaps someone on the list may know). It would seem that Genghis Khan began things when he was chosen supreme leader of the Mongols early in the 13th C. Within a few decades, his forces had conquered territory extending from northern China to Persia and the Caspian Sea. After Genghis died, his grandson, Batu conquered Russia, then centered on Kiev, and after defeating Hungary, withdrew back into Russia. Another Mongol ruler, Kublai Khan, conquered China and established the Yuan dynasty which lasted until the latter part of the 14th C. Yet others took Persia, Syria and Mesopotamia. The latter converted to Islam, and, having mixed with other Central Asian and Middle Eastern peoples, conquered India and founded the Mogul Empire in the early 16th C. I don't know how the Mongol's need to aggress and conquer can be explained any more than one can explain Alexander, who aggressed and conquered a millennium and a half earlier. It may have lain in the culture of the people, but the people who took part in the Mongol conquests were diverse. I suspect it was the leadership. Perhaps one could not consider oneself a Khan without emulating the exploits of the original Great Khan. As my professor friend said, to be a Mongol, that is what you had to do. Ed Weick >I don't think that the level of >aggressivity is an ethnic trait >or even genetic. >Any such statement on "human nature" >is very suspect. > >I am not aware of any present mongols >being more aggressive than other peoples. >And I am not being PC, just never heard about >such scientific evidence. >Most research comparing such ethnic or >race differences are scientifically >contraversial to say the least. > >The level of allowed/legit aggressivity >is a social construct >(level of control expected i.e. >aggressivity tolerated), with individual >variation being a mixture of nurture >environment and the given chemical balance >of the nervous system. > >eva > > > >> >> Competition has been with us since the dawn of time. Hunters and gatherers >> competed for harvesting territory, farmers competed as tribes for the best >> lands and then within tribes for the best lands, and manufacturers have >> competed since manufacturing became the dominant mode of business. The >> whole thing has been driven by real or perceived scarcity - either I get my >> cut or someone else will - and, it would seem, the need to dominate, which, >> though deplorable, is nevertheless a human characteristic. >> >> In this process, peaceful people tend to get kicked around - e.g., the >> peaceful Utes who once lived in southern Alberta were kicked out by the >> Blackfeet; Bantu tribes overran Africa; the Mongols, from far east Asia, >> overran Europe as the Huns had previously; and of course we are still, >> hopefully, familiar with what the Germans and Japanese tried to do just a >> few decades ago. I once asked a Professor of Russian History why the >> Mongols overran Russia and moved into eastern Europe in the 13th and 14th >> Centuries. He looked at me with some surprise, not as though it was a >> stupid question, but one that he had never really considered. His answer: >> "Why, they were Mongols, that's what Mongols did." >> >> Ed Weick >> >> >
