Jin Yong's views on Genghis Khan

[Ken Cheng]

In preparing to write LEGEND OF THE CONDOR HEROES, Jin Yong extensively researched the early history of the Mongol Empire...especially the life and career of Temujin (Genghis Khan). This is one of the reasons that Jin Yong's depiction of Genghis in LOCH stands among the most fully-realized, three-dimensional representations of a historical figure in a work of fiction. Genghis Khan in LOCH is very much a complete human being (with both strengths and flaws), and not the cartoon barbarian that he's often portrayed as in other representations of Genghis in popular culture.

That being said, do you think that overall, Jin Yong judged Genghis Khan to be a good character worth admiring, or a diabolical character worth condemning? On the one hand, we did see Genghis (particularly towards the end of LOCH) as a cruel megalomaniac willing to sacrifice millions to fulfill his ambitions. On the other hand, we also saw Genghis as the patriarch of the Mongol Empire...elevating his people from obscurity and poverty to become the most powerful nation on Earth. Jin Yong's depiction of Genghis as the founder of the Mongol Empire seemed to be a direct indictment of the diffidence, incompetence, short-sightedness, and selfishness of China's Sung Dynasty leaders, who despite Chinese civilization's great wealth and ingenuity, allowed China's people to endure centuries of poverty, inept government, and foreign invasion. In contrast, Genghis led his people from the fringes of existence to unprecedented prosperity. How did Jin Yong reconcile these two aspects of Genghis Khan...the nation builder who put shame to China's leaders vs. the savage, genocidal barbarian?

[wkeej]

in terms of history, genghis khan is always respected for uniting the various mongol tribes. because the tribes were constantly fighting one another, the unity by genghis help to put a stop to it. however, because of his ambition to conquer china, the chinese were affected. compared to the qing dynasty under the manchus, life was generally bad during the mongol rule. e.g. the mongols tend not to trust the chinese and consequently the people suffered.

actually, the mongols long has designs to capture china. they need a permanent place to stay. being on a fertile ground, china is always on their mind. it is only during kublai khan's time when they finally succeeded in settling down in china.

jy's view on genghis khan can be regared as one of respect and hate. respect for unifying the tribes and hatred for the start of suffering for the chinese people.

[c13:4567]

How did Jin Yong reconcile these two aspects of Genghis Khan...the nation builder who put shame to China's leaders vs. the savage, genocidal barbarian?

I don't think there is much to reconcile, one can be a unifier and a ruthless killer. there are famous examples in chinese history, qin shi huang comes to mind. as u said, jin yong did not go to extremes, either making him into a divine figure or a totally despicable villian. his supreme military achievements cannot be denied, that much is certain. history will not allow that, although one can frequently distort it.

i feel it is more revealing that jin yong uses the genghis khan character to show his interpretation of 英雄, and what is required to become one.

[Ken Cheng]

I think Jin Yong was a bit ambivalent on Genghis Khan's record: on the one hand, Jin Yong seemed to admire Genghis' visionary leadership and commitment to his cause. On the other hand, Jin Yong seemed to also condemn Genghis' ruthlessness in the achievement of his goals. Even Gwok Jing seemed to carry this ambivalence towards Genghis in particular and the Mongols in general after the end of LOCH (although it didn't stop him from taking action against Mongol aggression).

[Trien Chieu]

In contrast, Genghis led his people from the fringes of existence to unprecedented prosperity. How did Jin Yong reconcile these two aspects of Genghis Khan...the nation builder who put shame to China's leaders vs. the savage, genocidal barbarian?

But those unprecedented prosperity were short lived and the Mongol Empire lasted less than a century. Prosperity requires hard work and education in order to last, too bad the Mongol did not have any. Wealth will not last by robbing from the others.

[426mak]

But those unprecedented prosperity were short lived and the Mongol Empire lasted less than a century. Prosperity requires hard work and education in order to last, too bad the Mongol did not have any. Wealth will not last by robbing from the others.

Afraid I must disagree. Although illiterate Genghis did commission the first Mongol written language and history even pointing out his own flaws and mistakes. These are signs of intelligence and forward thinking.
As for education guaranteeing prosperity, Alexander of Macedonia was one of the most educated man of his time and his empire didn't even survive his death let alone a century.

[Doc Kwok]

But those unprecedented prosperity were short lived and the Mongol Empire lasted less than a century. Prosperity requires hard work and education in order to last, too bad the Mongol did not have any. Wealth will not last by robbing from the others.

Can you name a long-lasting regime anywhere, anytime, that did not involve a lot of preliminary bloodshed, plundering, back-stabbing and general maleficence when getting started?

[pannonian]

Can you name a long-lasting regime anywhere, anytime, that did not involve a lot of preliminary bloodshed, plundering, back-stabbing and general maleficence when getting started?

The Han Chinese regime that followed the Mongols began of course with great beneficence and rewarding of loyalty and goodness all-round. That the generals who helped conquer the empire for Ming ended up dead in short order was merely a coincidence that had nothing to do the native Han that was good unlike the barbarian Mongols. Nor the same thing happening in nearly every Chinese dynasty there was. Right up to the 20th century and the almost universally praised warlord who wanted the civil war to end so that both sides could fight against the foreign invaders. I'm sure the Han (therefore good) KMT would never do something like imprison this patriot and make him the longest serving political prisoner of the 20th century. That kind of thing would only be done by the barbaric Mongols, never by civilised Chinese.

Tang Taizong, now there's an example of a great Han emperor if there ever was one. He rewarded everyone who'd helped him, overlooking all rivals as that's the right thing to do for civilised Chinese. He never massacred his family rivals to put himself in power, as that kind of thing is only done by barbarians.

[Ken Cheng]

Afraid I must disagree. Although illiterate Genghis did commission the first Mongol written language and history even pointing out his own flaws and mistakes. These are signs of intelligence and forward thinking.
As for education guaranteeing prosperity, Alexander of Macedonia was one of the most educated man of his time and his empire didn't even survive his death let alone a century.

I think Genghis ordered the scholars under his aegis to devise a *written* Mongolian script based on the Tangut (Hsi Hsia) and Khitan scripts. Whatever they might have been, the written scripts of those civilizations are gone. We have fragments of artifacts bearing the script, but modern linguists have been unable to decipher it. There's no Rosetta Stone equivalent for them.

[pannonian]

I think Genghis ordered the scholars under his aegis to devise a *written* Mongolian script based on the Tangut (Hsi Hsia) and Khitan scripts. Whatever they might have been, the written scripts of those civilizations are gone. We have fragments of artifacts bearing the script, but modern linguists have been unable to decipher it. There's no Rosetta Stone equivalent for them.

And going by his correspondence with Qiu Chuji, Genghis was one of the more humbleminded and down to earth autocratic rulers of his scale ever seen, aspiring to improve the lives of his people and holding himself to a relatively spartan lifestyle. Among his successors, only Mongke was remotely at a simi9lar level of competence and worldview, and both were far better for their people than nearly every Chinese emperor was for the Chinese people. Imagine if a Chinese emperor unified the country, set a system of laws in place that ended strife for as long as that law was kept, kept the peace for a lifetime, hugely expanded the borders, brought undreamed of riches to the people, and all the while indulged in no excesses. Can't think of many who can approach even one aspect of Genghis's achievements.

[Ken Cheng]

And going by his correspondence with Qiu Chuji, Genghis was one of the more humbleminded and down to earth autocratic rulers of his scale ever seen, aspiring to improve the lives of his people and holding himself to a relatively spartan lifestyle.

I think Temujin also convened the world's first interfaith conference in the modern sense; at this conference, possibly for the first time ever, Buddhists, Daoists, Muslims, Manicheans, and Christians sat together to discuss and compare religious doctrine.

[Trien Chieu]

And going by his correspondence with Qiu Chuji, Genghis was one of the more humbleminded and down to earth autocratic rulers of his scale ever seen, aspiring to improve the lives of his people and holding himself to a relatively spartan lifestyle. Among his successors, only Mongke was remotely at a simi9lar level of competence and worldview, and both were far better for their people than nearly every Chinese emperor was for the Chinese people. Imagine if a Chinese emperor unified the country, set a system of laws in place that ended strife for as long as that law was kept, kept the peace for a lifetime, hugely expanded the borders, brought undreamed of riches to the people, and all the while indulged in no excesses. Can't think of many who can approach even one aspect of Genghis's achievements.

Well, where were all the undreamed of riches come from? They were not earned by hard work but by robbing/looting from others. Robbing/looting from others in a grand scale is a crime against humanity, not an achievement.

[pannonian]

Well, where were all the undreamed of riches come from? They were not earned by hard work but by robbing/looting from others. Robbing/looting from others in a grand scale is a crime against humanity, not an achievement.

It's fantastic the anachronisms you manage to come up with and persist with. "Crime against humanity"? That was an untested concept even in the 1940s when people who'd gone well beyond the pale were being legally tried for their actions. Go back in history, and conquest was an accepted method of making a living. That most traditionalist of Chinese sages, Confucius, upheld a dynasty that gained its primacy through conquest of the central plains. Your dismissal of conquest in favour of some ideal of hard work building up your nation is rejecting the Chinese experience in favour of the modern, principally Anglo-Saxon world.

Go read some history books.

[Mandred Skavenslayer]

Well, where were all the undreamed of riches come from? They were not earned by hard work but by robbing/looting from others. Robbing/looting from others in a grand scale is a crime against humanity, not an achievement.

Your sentiment is noble but reality does not permit it. Life is a struggle where you get what you are strong enough to keep. Laws are merely empty words without the strength to enforce them.

[Ken Cheng]

Your sentiment is noble but reality does not permit it. Life is a struggle where you get what you are strong enough to keep. Laws are merely empty words without the strength to enforce them.

When it comes to law and order, the "barbaric" Mongols, ironically, enforced law and order on the Silk Road for the first time since the collapse of the Roman Empire and the Han Empire eight-hundred years earlier, which allowed for resumption of trade and communication between the West (e.g. Christian Europe and the Byzantine Empire) and Asia for the first time in centuries. Trade routes that had been too dangerous to travel due to bandits, etc., became accessible again. Soon, the West and the East began to exchange goods and ideas again, and the result was the birth of the modern world.

Thus, in a way, the modern, globalized world we know today has the Mongol Empire to thank for its existence.

[Mandred Skavenslayer]

When it comes to law and order, the "barbaric" Mongols, ironically, enforced law and order on the Silk Road for the first time since the collapse of the Roman Empire and the Han Empire eight-hundred years earlier, which allowed for resumption of trade and communication between the West (e.g. Christian Europe and the Byzantine Empire) and Asia for the first time in centuries. Trade routes that had been too dangerous to travel due to bandits, etc., became accessible again. Soon, the West and the East began to exchange goods and ideas again, and the result was the birth of the modern world.

Thus, in a way, the modern, globalized world we know today has the Mongol Empire to thank for its existence.

And this was only possible because they had the strength to do so.

[pannonian]

When it comes to law and order, the "barbaric" Mongols, ironically, enforced law and order on the Silk Road for the first time since the collapse of the Roman Empire and the Han Empire eight-hundred years earlier, which allowed for resumption of trade and communication between the West (e.g. Christian Europe and the Byzantine Empire) and Asia for the first time in centuries. Trade routes that had been too dangerous to travel due to bandits, etc., became accessible again. Soon, the West and the East began to exchange goods and ideas again, and the result was the birth of the modern world.

Thus, in a way, the modern, globalized world we know today has the Mongol Empire to thank for its existence.

And TC's strictures on hard work being rewarded came about because, on the one hand, the bloody revolutionary and Napoleonic wars in Europe that resulted in the birth of nation states and a state of peace that allows said hard work to be rewarded, and on the other hand, the island and continental nations of Britain and the US that kept them safe from outside interference. Were it not for geographical locations and stable alliances of military might, TC's suggestions, applied historically, would result in a raid in short order and the riches carried off. Especially if a Mongol followed TC's suggestion of setting up shop in China during one of the more xenophobic periods in their history. One wonders what Guo Xiaotian and Yang Tiexin might have done if the wineshop owner were a Jin, rather than Qu Lingfeng.

[Ken Cheng]

One wonders what Guo Xiaotian and Yang Tiexin might have done if the wineshop owner were a Jin, rather than Qu Lingfeng.

They would have b*tched about "that Jin dog," but probably would have still bought his wine and gotten plastered because Gwok Siu Teen and Yeung Teet Sum were, after all, unrepentant rummies.

[Trien Chieu]

Your sentiment is noble but reality does not permit it. Life is a struggle where you get what you are strong enough to keep. Laws are merely empty words without the strength to enforce them.

The reality is you get what you earn from your hard work. What is yours is yours. If you put your hand on what is not belong to you, you will be arrested and face justice.

Thus, in a way, the modern, globalized world we know today has the Mongol Empire to thank for its existence.

Hell no. Without the Mongol Empire, life was much much better. The Mongol Empire genocide countless millions and robbing/looting countless wealth from others.

And TC's strictures on hard work being rewarded came about because, on the one hand, the bloody revolutionary and Napoleonic wars in Europe that resulted in the birth of nation states and a state of peace that allows said hard work to be rewarded, and on the other hand, the island and continental nations of Britain and the US that kept them safe from outside interference. Were it not for geographical locations and stable alliances of military might, TC's suggestions, applied historically, would result in a raid in short order and the riches carried off. Especially if a Mongol followed TC's suggestion of setting up shop in China during one of the more xenophobic periods in their history. One wonders what Guo Xiaotian and Yang Tiexin might have done if the wineshop owner were a Jin, rather than Qu Lingfeng.

Setting up shops and open restaurants require hard work and determination to succeed. Some will succeed, some will not but it's a right way to go instead of robbing/looting. Doing what is right is always more difficult compare to wrong doing.

[Mandred Skavenslayer]

Not sure which world you live in but I would love to visit it one day.