Cnut the Great, visionary or barbarian? Genghis Khan, excellent administrator or vicious bastard? George VI, stuttering fool, or twat? Marquis De Sade, all round nice guy or misunderstood?
I would have used a colon after each of the names, but still... Cnut the Great, visionary or barbarian? Both. Genghis Khan, excellent administrator or vicious bastard? Both. George VI, stuttering fool, or twat? Both. Marquis De Sade, all round nice guy or misunderstood? I only liked her first album.
No serious historian considers Genghis Khan a excellent administrator. What the **** is that ignorant ****?
That's the thing though - he spent his entire life creating it, not running it. Excellent and efficient conqueror? yes, of course. Administrator? Was he ****.
Utter madness. I can't fathom why or how you would come to such a conclusion. Where are you sourcing your information? Conn Iggulden? Check out the works of Jack Weatherford and David Morgan for expert opinion.
I don't know about that. He allowed religious freedom and established the Yassa which was *****lia's legal system of the time and nicknamed the 'Great Administration' by some historians.
I have. And I came to entirely different conclusions. I never came away from it thinking Genghis was a great administrator. The Yassa, for all its worth, was a fairly basic legal system. At least in Genghis' time. Religious freedom can hardly be classed as an administrative decision. How can you possibly hope to rule over an empire so diverse if you don't allow it? The only real administrative excellence I would give to Genghis would be the yam stations and riders and that is borderline. It's simply strategic planning really. As you'll both know, Genghis would use someone if they were good at something, no matter what their position in life. To claim that while he was planning and conquering massive areas of land, with very, very few years of peace, that he somehow oversaw everything in his empire? Nonsense. He knew what talents people his had and placed them into positions accordingly. Nothing you will say will convince me otherwise. Mainly because almost anything said about Genghis is open to interpretation. Unless you treat everything in the secret history as fact of course. If Gambol had said Kublai Khan was an excellent administrator, I'd agree, but he never so I don't. Not going to get bogged into an argument about this either. A lot of what is known about the *****l history is subjective, like every other empires history.
Genghis Khan's empire barely outlived him. Which would suggest it was largely illusory, based on nothing but fear. You might as well say the Kray twins were great administrators. Genghis Khan=a Hells Angel on horseback. Actually that's not fair on Hells Angels; they'll probably outlast Sonny Barger
Interesting. Your initial posts on the subject are nothing more than expletive-laden drivel, yet now you are offering a cohesive and intelligent counter-argument. However, you've actually done a pretty good job in promoting Genghis as a fine administrator. If you're interested, I could probably find you some work as a researcher.
Perhaps we can debate the merits of Cnut next? Or the organisational brilliance of Columbus, the Great Explorer?
