Mournful relics of the Mongol invasion found

That is quite amazing and sad at the same time.

yep agree

    For me, that is a most touching, most deeply rooted archaeological discovery. THis reminds us of the price that ordinary individuals have to pay for the exansion and subsequent rise of other powerful individuals or factions...
    The lives of these people become entangled and forever confused among the maelstrom of human conflict and conquest. Their numbers become a mere statistic in which future generations coldly extrapolate evidence for the cause of history. And yet the sad part is with all this experience of bloodshed and manslaughter evident and ingrained within our consciousness and  social memories, we refuse to learn the lessons that the past has tried in vain to teach us through the most abhorrent and violent examples. When will we ever learn....

"Only the dead see the end of the war". Unfortunately mainly the ordinary people see it... 
Btw, where indeed is this Cegl�d? Hungary?

Cegl�d is near the centre of Hungary.
It's just north of where Batu Khan's 3 armies converged.
B�la IV. - King of Hungary during Mongol/Tartar invasion. Lived to rebuild the country, the "Second Founder".

1222 Golden Bulla (constitution) - Estimated population of Hungary at this time  2 million
1241-42  Mongol/Tartar Invasion - Population after 1 year Mongols estimated  1.2 million

One half of all towns and villages burned and destroyed.
Record in a western cronicle : "Kingdom of Hungary after 2 centuries is no more."
The Great Khan died and Batu departed for election of new Khan ~ only thing that saved Hungary from the fate of Kiev!

Edited by Esquire

Originally posted by Esquire Cegl�d is near the centre of Hungary. It's just north of where Batu Khan's 3 armies converged. B�la IV. - King of Hungary during Mongol/Tartar invasion. Lived to rebuild the country, the "Second Founder".   1222 Golden Bulla (constitution) - Estimated population of Hungary at this time  2 million 1241-42  Mongol/Tartar Invasion - Population after 1 year Mongols estimated  1.2 million One half of all towns and villages burned and destroyed. Record in a western cronicle : "Kingdom of Hungary after 2 centuries is no more." The Great Khan died and Batu departed for election of new Khan ~ only thing that saved Hungary from the fate of Kiev!

In fact the exact population losses are unknown. It is usually estimated 15-25%. In the territories east to the Danube was the greatest devastation, but these area had a lower population density than Western Hungary.

By the way according to latest historical research not the death of the great khan was the cause (or the main cause) of the withdrawal, but the heavy losses and the lack of pasture.

Edited by Raider

Before tartars, were magyars who wraught havoc in Europe; beofre them, were the huns. And so on . . .  and no one better in terms of mass kilings.  As a person that knows having some tartar ancestry, tough I'am considering me fully romanian, I have no problem in accepting what some tribal ancestors of mine have done bad; no, no wonder that some primitives, tribal, nomadic and herd-like clannish population, could produce nothing more than havoc, so, I believe that  the more evoluated populations that perpetrate mass killings in the name of an idea (god or simply an ideal) are more disgustingly than the poor nomads of Asia. The more recent history shows us pathetically that hundreds of thousend of armenians were butcherd by turks, hundreds of milions of people killed by islam in it's expansion, milions of jews killed by germans, other milions of people killed by russian communists, and millions of europeans and others killed by christianism for 2 000 yrs, not to mention the killings of poor tribal american indians . . .  and the list is by no means exhausted. To a nomad killer, as to an wild animal, should be offered moral absolution for kiling, but to the "civilized" ideologist or "God-guided", should we ever do the same????

Originally posted by Esquire I do not believe in your characterizations: "poor nomads of Asia"  "as to a wild animal"  "herd-like clannish population"... They were influenced on all sides by great cultures and were no more wild nor herdlike than the poor serfs of Europe.

 

No, anthropologically, and from historical time periods point of view correlated with societal development, they are "primitives"; "tribal"; "prehistoric". The nomadism is carachterized by all that. As for your affirmation that "they were influenced on all sides by great cultures", that means nothing: all primitives, with some chance, get civilized. IN TIME.  And WITH  HELP.

 

I do believe your claim "more recent history " "civilized" people prove no different! Seems the human race never learns. With modern science and technology the civilized 20th Century is more bloody, more violent than any since the caveman.

 

Well . . . not very surpring, being canadian like me : there is a  trend in actual thinking that is trying to delete any sense of degree or proportion, and its final goal is to put the equal between cultural relativism and moral relativism. There are many victims of that trend . . . .

You should try analyse the facts before you put a label to a century: in our century (20, 21), did live and live people animated by the same old world vision as people in the first christian century . . . , but that is not what carachterize our times.

 

That we can kill more today, doesen�t mean that we are worse than our ancestors, it mean that we only have better means to do that and that we are arithmetically more than our ancestors. Som old-fashion guys, these morally "living fossils", seize quickly this "blessing" oportunity of modern means to devastate.  Ideologies like communism (the greatest killer in past century), fascism, or religions like christianism and islam, are the very culprit you hasten to find elsewhere . . . with this vague term "human race".

The people are very feebleminded: they love to love fanatically something: an illusory god, an utopic ideal like de brotherhood of men or economical equality, or the purity of a rase, or . . .  there is more bullsh*t than that! But we are no more the same people from nomadic periods, with tribal vision of honoour and justice, or with a bloody god-inspired morality.

Conclusion: I was speaking individualizing a category (or many) from our recent times; I did not speak of our times in whole, and not speaking of us as a whole. We are not the same primitives of the past. At least not in these more evoluated parts of the earth that some call civlized world". .

 

Edited by Boztorgay

I read this and take it as a reminder that there really was a tragic human cost to the reign of the Mongols, irregardless of exactly who did what and why.  This was just one of countless villages which would lie in the path of any invading army in those days.  Be they Mongol, Magyar or Hun -- or any of the enemies of the country in which this village was founded -- the outcome is never really in doubt against the sort of ruthlessness that could be unleashed upon its helpless inhabitants.

Originally posted by tadamson Is there a link to the original article for this ? Was it in a newspaper ?

I have found it in the net, but there is an article in a notable Hungarian historical periodical (Its name is Rubicon 1/2006.)

In Hungarian:

http://www.radio.hu/index.php?cikk_id=159130

http://www.mult-kor.hu/rubicon/cikk.php?id=1638&aktualis =1