I look forward to the statues of Hitler and Stalin! :rolleyes:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-17703290
QuoteGenghis Khan sculpture unveiled at Marble Arch
A bronze sculpture of Mongolian warrior Genghis Khan has been unveiled at Marble Arch in central London.
The 16ft tall (5m) statue captures the legendary leader wearing Mongolian armour on his steed.
The sculpture by artist Dashi Namdakov will stand next to Cumberland Gate until early September.
The artist, who had an interest in the nomadic tribes of Mongolia, wanted to honour the warrior on the 850th anniversary of his birth.
He said: "If I wanted to show him as a warrior I would have shown him as a warrior, but he is a thinker in this case. He is a divine figure in my country."
Namdakov was born in a Siberian village and brought up in the Buryat Buddhist culture.
'Essence of nomadism'
His village was close to the area which was historically controlled by nomadic Mongol tribes and which led to his interest in Buryat and Mongol cultures.
Westminster Council selected the statue as part of its ongoing City of Sculpture festival, which was launched in 2010.
The festival aims to install works of art across the borough in the run-up to the Diamond Jubilee and the Olympic and Paralympic Games in the capital.
Halcyon Gallery said the sculpture was specially commissioned for Marble Arch.
The artwork captures the intricate details of the medieval Mongolian armour and dress, including the golden plaques on the livery and the plaited hair.
The decision to depict the warrior on his horse embodies "the very essence of nomadism and brings the culture of the ancient Mongols directly to the public", the gallery said.
The sculpture's unveiling comes ahead of an exhibition by the artist in the gallery in Mayfair next month.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on April 16, 2012, 11:00:54 AM
I look forward to the statues of Hitler and Stalin! :rolleyes:
Yes, because Hitler and Stalin are equivalents to Genghis Khan. :rolleyes:
God. We really will put up a statue to anyone :mellow:
Quote from: grumbler on April 16, 2012, 11:08:01 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on April 16, 2012, 11:00:54 AM
I look forward to the statues of Hitler and Stalin! :rolleyes:
Yes, because Hitler and Stalin are equivalents to Genghis Khan. :rolleyes:
Nope, they are small players compared to him. Didn't he kill more people than the two of them together?
Quote from: Solmyr on April 16, 2012, 11:12:26 AM
Nope, they are small players compared to him. Didn't he kill more people than the two of them together?
:lol: No. The histories of the times exaggerated everything. There is no doubt that millions died, directly or indirectly, during his campaigns, but more than the fifty million who died as a result of Hitler's actions, and the twenty to thirty million more who died as a result of Stalin's acts (independent of Hitler's)? Know whey!
Well at least it is not a second George Washington statue.
Quote from: Valmy on April 16, 2012, 11:44:45 AM
Well at least it is not a second George Washington statue.
That man was a beast.
London would make a great setting for a Vlad Tepes statue. All those spiked railings. :D
As far as mass murderers go he had some style.
Quote from: Malthus on April 16, 2012, 12:34:05 PM
London would make a great setting for a Vlad Tepes statue. All those spiked railings. :D
And he actually visited London, even if it was 400 years after his death.
Quote from: Malthus on April 16, 2012, 12:34:05 PM
London would make a great setting for a Vlad Tepes statue. All those spiked railings. :D
Can you get to the point?
Malthus' railing against the statue is rather pointed.
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 16, 2012, 04:06:36 PM
Malthus' railing against the statue is rather pointed.
Disagree. I think he is engaged in mere fenciful mewsing, without realizing that mews generally lack fences.
These comments pierce me to the core. :(
Quote from: grumbler on April 16, 2012, 11:41:45 AM
Quote from: Solmyr on April 16, 2012, 11:12:26 AM
Nope, they are small players compared to him. Didn't he kill more people than the two of them together?
:lol: No. The histories of the times exaggerated everything. There is no doubt that millions died, directly or indirectly, during his campaigns, but more than the fifty million who died as a result of Hitler's actions, and the twenty to thirty million more who died as a result of Stalin's acts (independent of Hitler's)? Know whey!
Seems like he's in the middle of them
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1350272/Genghis-Khan-killed-people-forests-grew-carbon-levels-dropped.html#ixzz1sFBDyIW3
QuoteGenghis Khan has been branded the greenest invader in history - after his murderous conquests killed so many people that huge swathes of cultivated land returned to forest.
The Mongol leader, who established a vast empire between the 13th and 14th centuries, helped remove nearly 700million tons of carbon from the atmosphere, claims a new study.
The deaths of 40million people meant that large areas of cultivated land grew thick once again with trees, which absorb carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.
And, although his methods may be difficult for environmentalists to accept, ecologists believe it may be the first ever case of successful manmade global cooling.
'It's a common misconception that the human impact on climate began with the large-scale burning of coal and oil in the industrial era,' said Julia Pongratz, who headed the research by the Carnegie Institution's Department of Global Ecology.
'Actually, humans started to influence the environment thousands of years ago by changing the vegetation cover of the Earth's landscapes when we cleared forests for agriculture,' she told Mongabay.com.
The 700million tons of carbon absorbed as a result of the Mongol empire is about the same produced in a year from the global use of petrol.
Exaggerations. When people talk about Genghis Khan, they refer to the whole period of Mongolian rule in Asia, even though most of the deaths in China, for example, were inflicted by his descendants. Baghdad was destroyed by Hulagu, the Golden Horde invaded Europe after his death etc... Marco Polo clearly states that the horrific memories people have of the Middle East massacres are related to the Ilkhans and not to Genghis Khan, who at that moment had become quite a legendary figure...
There were certainly plently of deaths attributed directly to Genghis, but actual figures are impossible to state. For example, Genghis ordered the terror-destruction of Khwarazmian cities as a preventative measure, but we have no idea what the pre-destruction population of the area was.
Suffice it to say that the Mongols had no qualms whatsoever at ordering the total destruction of the whole populations of cities over a large area, to spread terror and to prevent uprisings, for no better reason than conquest as human predation. Genghis certainly had no objection to this, which makes it sorta difficult to see him as a "good guy". :lol:
Mind you, the whole "making towers of skulls" thing sometimes attributed to Genghis was a later development - by Tamerlane.
ITT, I learned that Hitler has the world record for accumulated carbon credits.
This is very odd.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on April 16, 2012, 05:09:37 PM
Seems like he's in the middle of them
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1350272/Genghis-Khan-killed-people-forests-grew-carbon-levels-dropped.html#ixzz1sFBDyIW3
:lmfao: You seriously expect me to believe you when you don't even read your own source?
QuoteBut the bloody Mongol invasion, which lasted a century and a half and led to an empire that spanned 22 per cent of the Earth's surface, immediately stood out for its longevity.
You don't seriously expect me to believe that Genghis Khan led for a century and a half, do you?
He was almost certainly as bloody-minded a leader as the world has known on that kind of scale, but 40 million dead is at the top limit for the deaths in all of the Mongol conquests (and most of them are attributed to things other than direct Mongol actions, and most of them were in China). If someone wants to ague that GK was responsible for 6 to 10 million deaths, I won't argue.
Quote from: Malthus on April 16, 2012, 05:41:45 PM
Suffice it to say that the Mongols had no qualms whatsoever at ordering the total destruction of the whole populations of cities over a large area, to spread terror and to prevent uprisings, for no better reason than conquest as human predation. Genghis certainly had no objection to this, which makes it sorta difficult to see him as a "good guy". :lol:
Have you actually read or listened to someone who was trying to argue that he was a "good guy?" Man, that musta been hilarious. :lol:
Quote from: grumbler on April 16, 2012, 06:29:59 PM
Quote from: Malthus on April 16, 2012, 05:41:45 PM
Suffice it to say that the Mongols had no qualms whatsoever at ordering the total destruction of the whole populations of cities over a large area, to spread terror and to prevent uprisings, for no better reason than conquest as human predation. Genghis certainly had no objection to this, which makes it sorta difficult to see him as a "good guy". :lol:
Have you actually read or listened to someone who was trying to argue that he was a "good guy?" Man, that musta been hilarious. :lol:
Read the article in the OP. To some he's more than a good guy - he's a "divine figure". :lol:
Quote from: grumbler on April 16, 2012, 06:29:59 PM
Have you actually read or listened to someone who was trying to argue that he was a "good guy?" Man, that musta been hilarious. :lol:
That book 'Ghenghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World" seemed to come pretty close to claiming that. One would think the Turkic peoples of central Asia were best people evah.
I've a couple of friends who've been to Mongolia. They fucking love Genghis Khan over there.
Quote from: Sheilbh on April 16, 2012, 10:52:59 PM
I've a couple of friends who've been to Mongolia. They fucking love Genghis Khan over there.
Makes sense as one of their few renowned figures.
Quote from: grumbler on April 16, 2012, 06:28:02 PM
QuoteBut the bloody Mongol invasion, which lasted a century and a half and led to an empire that spanned 22 per cent of the Earth's surface, immediately stood out for its longevity.
You don't seriously expect me to believe that Genghis Khan led for a century and a half, do you?
He was the Grumbler of his time. :sleep:
Quote from: Malthus on April 16, 2012, 10:32:44 PM
Read the article in the OP. To some he's more than a good guy - he's a "divine figure". :lol:
Well, Satan is a "divine figure" to many Christians, as well, and he isn't "more than a good guy" to them! :lol:
Quote from: Sheilbh on April 16, 2012, 10:52:59 PM
I've a couple of friends who've been to Mongolia. They fucking love Genghis Khan over there.
I am sure. But I don't think Malthus was responding to them when he argues that GK's actions "makes it sorta difficult to see him as a "good guy".
Maybe he just wants to be prepared in case someone does try to argue that GK was "a good guy."
Quote from: grumbler on April 17, 2012, 06:52:45 AM
Quote from: Malthus on April 16, 2012, 10:32:44 PM
Read the article in the OP. To some he's more than a good guy - he's a "divine figure". :lol:
Well, Satan is a "divine figure" to many Christians, as well, and he isn't "more than a good guy" to them! :lol:
Your argument is that the guy quoted in the OP thinks Genghis is "satanic", and that's why he's putting up a statue of him?
Interesting. :hmm:
Quote from: grumbler on April 17, 2012, 06:55:23 AM
Quote from: Sheilbh on April 16, 2012, 10:52:59 PM
I've a couple of friends who've been to Mongolia. They fucking love Genghis Khan over there.
I am sure. But I don't think Malthus was responding to them when he argues that GK's actions "makes it sorta difficult to see him as a "good guy".
Maybe he just wants to be prepared in case someone does try to argue that GK was "a good guy."
Since my comment was aimed at the OP, you think wrong.
Quote from: Tonitrus on April 16, 2012, 05:44:07 PM
ITT, I learned that Hitler has the world record for accumulated carbon credits.
:XD:
They should have put up a statue to Genghis Cohen instead. :(
Quote from: Malthus on April 17, 2012, 07:51:43 AM
Your argument is that the guy quoted in the OP thinks Genghis is "satanic", and that's why he's putting up a statue of him?
Interesting. :hmm:
So my argument is
what? :lol:
I don't think the Mongols even
have the character of Satan in their religion!
Quote from: grumbler on April 18, 2012, 06:06:28 PM
I don't think the Mongols even have the character of Satan in their religion!
Well some of them were Christians and Muslims.
We're all a little bit Mongolian. The Mongolian blue spot birthmark appears in two thirds of the worlds population, spread entirely by Genghis' invading hordes.
Quote from: Valmy on April 18, 2012, 10:34:36 PM
Quote from: grumbler on April 18, 2012, 06:06:28 PM
I don't think the Mongols even have the character of Satan in their religion!
Well some of them were Christians and Muslims.
6% Christian Shamanist and 4% Muslim according to the CIA fact book. I'll take 10-1 odds.
Technically you can count most Central Asians and Tatars as Mongols.