If anyone expected Dr. Rossabi to pull punches during his lecture out of deference to the occasion, they were proven wrong. He gave a rather candid reassessment of his book Khubilai Khan and the recent deification and "vulgarization," as he put it, of the popular image of Chinggis Khaan. It was a brave position to take given the politics involved, but he expressed his concern about exalting the positives of the Mongol Empire and attempting to conceal the negatives of the Mongol conquests. Noting that, of course, this is a response in some respect to a long history in the West of portraying the Mongols unfairly, still he insisted that honest and factual examinations of history are of paramount importance in scholarly research. The facts indicate that there were positives and negatives associated with the Mongol conquests of Eurasia.
Dr. Rossabi also added that in re-evaluating Mongolian history, he is somewhat troubled by the fact that other great Mongolians are often neglected in the national consciousness. Mongolian currency, for example, has images of Chinggis Khaan and Sukhbaatar, but not of Natsagdorj, Zanabazar, or others. But, at the same time, he said it was understandable because Chinggis Khaan and Sukhbaatar are Mongolia's great generals, and other countries also find it hard to give space to leaders of the arts and sciences. Hero worship of military leaders is a common phenomenon around the world. I remember the first time I saw a German 5 Mark bill and it had a portrait of Carl Friedrich Gauss. I was impressed to see a mathematician receiving such an honor. But, maybe Germany is one place generals are best left unremembered. In the rest of the world we have a tendency to measure greatness in terms of conquest of the physical environment as opposed to the human mind.
Overall the lecture was enjoyable, most especially for Dr. Rossabi's candid thoughts. He certainly elicited numerous questions at the end of the lecture which poured into the reception afterwards. Congratulations to you Dr. Rossabi for your award and thank you for an informative lecture.
6 comments:
Dr. Rossabi's talk sounds fascinating, and I'm glad to hear that he addressed all sides of the issue openly.
However, I have a somewhat nit-picky detail question. I was under the impression that Zanabazar is the individual portrayed on tugrug notes of 100-and-smaller denominations. Is that someone else?
Sukhbaatar is portrayed on denominations 100 tugriks or less. He looks more lama like than general like in contemporary notes, though.
Very interesting, thanks for clearing that up Brian!
Also, whoever said it was Zanabazar at Dave's quiz night that one time was very much wrong.
For what it is worth, Wikipedia has a page about the Mongolian tugrik. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongolian_t%C3%B6gr%C3%B6g. The Dave's quiz night that evening was definitely wrong. Hope you didn't lose because of it!
Dear Brian,
I read with much interest your article about Dr. Rossabi and Chinggis Khan.
I'm not an real expert on this subject but 've read a lot of books, older ones and recent ones about Mongols and Chingis Khan and agree with Dr. Rossabi that in literature one can observe the same trend of emphasizing the negatives 20, 30 years ago and emphasizing the positives in most literature, published around his 800' birthday.
I would like to publicize your column about this subject on my weblog:
http://mongolschinaandthesilkroad.blogspot.com/
and kindly ask your permission,
Kind regards,
Hans
Thanks for your interest in the blog. You are free to republish the entry if you wish. Note at the bottom of the blog in the footer that all the content is licensed under a creative commons 3.0 non-commercial-share-alike license. As long as you reference our blog, I am happy to share. Thanks for asking.
Post a Comment