The Mongols 2nd (second) edition Text Only

The Peoples of Europe

by David O. Morgan

The Mongols

Genres: History, Nonfiction, Asia, Historical, Medieval History, World History, Medieval

Paperback

First published January 1, 1983

Reviews

[Jan-Maat]

A great overview of the Mongols that covers their rise, rule and division into the various successor states including the Ilkhanate (Iran) and the Golden Horde (Southern Russia). Provides a good overview of the historiography and teaches an appreciation of the basic problem of Mongol history - the would-be scholar has to be the master of many languages.

Morgan tells us that books about the Mongols can be divided into two categories, those written by authors who know probably just one of the languages in which important sources of information about the Mongols were written (Chinese or Persian), and those written by authors who know none of those languages and rely entirely on the Secondary literature. Both groups however Morgan considers are strongly influenced by the 1710 book Histoire du Grand Genhizcan written by Petis de la Croix based on Persian histories translated into French.

Morgan's book was written, implausible though it sounds, for the Peoples of Europe series and so has a deliberate slant towards the perspective of the impact of the Mongols on Europe and contacts between Europe and the Mongol world. However he points out that the Mongols themselves were most interested in control over the Mongol Steppe, and after that dominating China, everything else was peripheral.

The chapter on the Ilkhanate - the Mongols in Persia - is, I felt, the richest as it was Morgan's specialism. The Mongol empire was extremely large but short lived, it's successor states in Persia and China lasted a little longer, while those in Central Asia and Southern Russia which based themselves in steppe lands survived the longest of of which Morgan briskly sketches out.

[Ozymandias · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is often described (and by Mongolists, not just history fans) as the best introduction to the Mongol Empire. Having struggled to find more up-to-date general histories I suspect this is true. Although I wish we had something a bit more recent since I know there’s been an unusual amount of work done on the Mongols in the last three decades. As an introduction this book does its job well. It covers pretty much any topic relating to the conquests, even if the level of detail naturally varies. It’s not too long either (206 pages of text) so it won’t prove to strenuous a read to those looking for a quick introduction to the topic.

I liked the way the book is divided. It starts off on historiographical problems (and there are many), Genghis’ life and conquests, the organization of the Mongol Empire, one chapter each of Mongols in China, Persia, and Europe, and then an outline of their collapse. Makes it easy to find exactly what you’re looking for. Each section is informative, although given the book’s length its naturally more summary than specific. The one area that does go into more detail is the section on Europe. This is a result of the book being part of the Peoples of Europe Series I suspect, and no doubt Morgan felt an obligation to live up to the focus on that. But it feels odd after so much rushed summary to stop and go on for a dozen pages about Christian authors sent out to the Mongol court, and Mongol ambassadors being sent back.

It’s interesting to see just how negative this book is. I’ve read just enough to know that Mongolian studies have really been taking off for the last several decades and are providing a more positive view of the Mongol Empire. None of that here: Morgan views the Mongols as essentially just a force for destruction with no sort of positive impact on the population they devastated. His explanation for this is that as a nomadic people they had no interest in sedentary life except as a source of wealth. Sometimes this seemed a bit simplistic, and I’m curious to see how other authors explain Mongol decision-making processes.

This book serves as a good introduction, but I feel it doesn’t go into enough depth to do more than whet your appetite. There’s still a good market for an in-depth look at Mongolian conquests and rule. But of course you could never get such a book as part of a series on the Peoples of Europe. It left me curious enough to seek out further reading, which is probably the best thing you can say about an introductory text.

[Christopher]

David Morgan provides a comprehensive survey of the Mongol people in the second edition of The Mongols. It is part of the “Peoples of Europe” series, and while the Mongols are not European, they did have an influence on European history. In fact, Morgan points out that in the Mongols’ brief presence in Europe, there was no guarantee that they would not sweep through Europe as they did in the Middle East and China (p. 1). To treat the Mongols as of little importance to European history from the assumptions of the present would be an anachronistic disservice. With this in mind Morgan’s intention in this work is to not merely provide a history of the Mongol Empire, but to provide a slim, introductory text about the Mongols, who established the largest continuous land empire in history, in the thirteenth century, and fragments of their empire remained major players from China to Iran, Russia, and even Europe.
The organization of the book betrays its purpose in that of its nine sections two of them discuss the sources historians use to understand the Mongols, and then elucidates an overview of Mongol culture and background as a people. The third chapter examines the formation of an imperial Mongol identity under Chingiz Khan, and the fourth chapter deals with the institutions that defined the empire. Following that, the author looks at the role of the Mongols in various regions: China, Persia and Russia, and then Europe. The seventh section comprises what became of the Mongols following the decline of their empire, while a chapter new to the second edition discusses Mongol historiography. Here Morgan takes the opportunity to note where others have improved upon his work, and where he disagrees with the conclusions of others. This comprehensive approach is more than a mere chronology of events and a list of names, and takes seriously the subject in which it rests by presenting a more complete understanding of the Mongol Empire and people.
One of the themes that Morgan deals with in the book are the formation of an imperial ideology from these steppe nomads. It is this point that Morgan demonstrates a sort of agnosticism on the subject. He no doubt notes the victories that allowed the Mongols to come to control an empire, but offers little in the way of what might have motivated them to conquer. When Morgan discusses the Secret History, the only history about the Mongols, by the Mongols that has survived, he notes that the account seems to focus primarily internally, and has little to say about non-Mongolian peoples, suggesting the non-Mongolian peoples were of little importance to the Khans, or that there was no exact unified strategy, if not both (p. 13). Towards the end of the book he notes even more bluntly there is no discernable “motivation”, and we only can piece together what happened historically (p. 187). The author notes the historic obsession of steppe nomadic tribes’ dream of conquering China, and discusses Owen Lattimore’s theory that a power vacuum often took shape in the steppes once a steppe people overcame China with their attention focused on the rich lands of China (pp. 63-64). According to Owen, it is likely that this is why Chingiz Khan returned to the steppe to incorporate other Mongol and Turkic tribes (p. 64). Morgan assures the reader than this is a sound theory, but is not demonstrable in any finality from what sources are available (p. 64). This particular ambivalence appears as weakness in Morgan’s account. He is attempting to give a holistic vision of the Mongols, and not just a history of the Mongol people and their empire, but fails to discern a guiding purpose behind the expansion. While the honesty is commendable, it does not contribute to his thesis as a whole, and even in the final chapter of the book where advances in the field are dealt with, admits there are no empirical answers.
Another major aspect that Morgan inspects is the way the Mongols related to the civilizations they triumphed over, did or did not become absorbed, and how this explains why the Mongolian hordes fractured, and disappeared. The three most prominent areas in which this is observable is in China, Persia, and Russia. China witnessed a distinct distance between the Mongol rulers and their Chinese subjects, most obviously illustrated in that while lower level Chinese officials were kept; the Chinese were not allowed to ascend to any particularly high office, even under Qubilai Khan (p. 97). Morgan suggests the non-Chinese appointed to these positions, especially foreign Muslims, was a way to place loyalty securely in the Mongol Yuan dynasty (p. 97). The Mongols did not endorse the Chinese system wholesale so much as they simply utilized what was most useful in the system (p. 97). This approach in practice looked like a replica bureau in each province that was internally centralized, but decentralized in relation to new emperor (pp. 111-12). Other than appointing non-Chinese officials in higher ranks, the Yuan also used a four-tiered social ladder, with Mongols at the top as a social control mechanism (p. 112). The Mongols tended to favor Buddhism, especially Tibetan Buddhism, but it was not a wholesale adoption, and worked more so to prop up a ruler in Tibet that would be loyal to the Yuan (pp. 108-11). In the long run, the Yuan were toppled, and the new Ming emperor encouraged the Mongols to stay where their military skills were used to great effect, and were thus incorporated (pp. 116-118). Persia witnessed the opposite problem in that after thirty-nine years of pagan rule Ghazan converted to the Muslim faith, making him immediately identifiable to those he ruled, and to other Muslims throughout the Middle East (pp. 147-148). Russia provided the most unique instance, where there was a clear difference between the Golden Horde and their Russian subjects. Russia was on the geographic peripheral of the Mongols, and the Golden Horde maintained its distance from the conquered Russians (p. 127). This distance was cemented in that the Golden Horde’s alliance with the Malmuks, which facilitated a conversion to Islam, rather than a conversion to the Orthodox Christianity of the Russians, allowing them to begin to identify more with their Turkish subjects than their Russian subjects (pp. 127-128). It is noted that the likeliest explanation why the Golden Horde lasted longer than the Ikhanate of Persia and the Yuan of China, is that the Golden Horde maintained a more traditionally Mongol steppe life and customs rather than embracing settled civilization like in China and Persia (p. 151). While Morgan’s account is brief in this section, but succeeds far more in demonstrating his thesis due to the fact that it is a solid overview of the diversity of the Mongolian Empire in its complexity, and deals more thoroughly with the theme he is exploring.
The weakness of Morgan’s admitted lack of ideological explanation is overshadowed by his more thorough presentation of the role in which the Mongol Empire was dissolved largely due to identification with its subjects and the embrace of a more sedentary lifestyle. He provides numerous maps and a basic overview of pre-imperial Mongolian culture in which to compare the later Mongolian developments. The initial focus on formation and identity on the steppe, culture, and social structure gives the brief historical commentary more depth and meaning, all the while introducing the reader to more than a history of the Mongol Empire, but a complete overview of the Mongols themselves. In addition, despite the purpose of the series the book is a part of, the author does little to directly connect the Mongols to European history, except where they appear in European territory. He does not discuss the role of the Mongols in Europe in any depth, but this is forgivable because the purpose of the book is too understand the Mongols, and not only to recognize the role of the Mongols in European history. Morgan consistently cites his major sources, for the reader and constantly referenced sources allows the reader to be familiar with them, and can point the person in the right direction for personal research. Unfortunately, Morgan is only has a strong command of European and Persian sources, and less so with Chinese sources, but as he note sin his introduction, the many number of languages one would need to master in order to command the vast range of sources is daunting indeed. The final chapter is an excellent overview of advances in the historiography of the Mongols in the decades since the original publication of the book, which offers even more in terms of further research. Morgan’s goal of crafting an introduction to the Mongolian people is, as a whole, a success, and other than its more apparent shortcomings, is recommended for anyone looking to appreciate the Mongols better.

[Skallagrimsen]

My memory of this book suffers from the circumstances under which I read it. I was a glutton for the history of the Mongol empire for about a year back in the mid 00's. As I often do when obsessed with a subject, I read dozens of relevant sources in a row, in whole or part, usually more than one at time, and cross referencing them as I went. I just couldn't seem to get enough about those hordes of illiterate horse archers who came within a whisker of conquering the entire Eurasian landmass. The upshot was that I learned a lot. The downside is I can't always recall where. My sense is that The Mongols by David O. Morgan, is standard history, good enough to get through, but not good enough to stand out in the crowd of overlapping books from around the same time. Nor do I remember why it's subtitled "Peoples of Europe." The Mongols are not a European people. True, they invaded Europe, and had a huge impact on the trajectory of European history. But I doubt anyone would refer to the British, for instance, as a people of India. Still, I feel confident enough to tentatively recommend this book as an adequate introduction to the endlessly fascinating Mongol empire.

[Jacob Lines · Rating 4 out of 5]

The Mongols were a big deal. They conquered all the way from China to Eastern Europe. But they were a lot more than just fearsome warriors in Genghis Khan’s company. They also ruled some territories for a long time. This book tells the fascinating story of how they conquered and then how they governed. It tells about their religion, their laws, their military structure, their conquests, their descendants, and their decline down to the last little khanate. Great story, well told. I really enjoyed it.

[Bubba · Rating 4 out of 5]

I met David Morgan while studying at Madison, and the prose of the book is much like the way he talks: it's witty and easy to follow, but chuck full of rich details. That being said this is just an introduction to the Mongols, I think it's only around 200 pages, and the Chaghatai Khanate, for example, only gets a brief mention. He hits heavy on the Ilkhans, which are his thing, and it's interesting to hear some details about the "Persian" form of Buddhism that they allowed to flourish. Anyway, the guy is a good scholar, writes well and talks about Mongols plundering and stuff, while setting there empire in the context of Medieval European and Middle Eastern history. He does so with the sorts of flourishes that only Europeans are really good at, because it's their history, i.e. "King Henry (the something or other) and the Holy Roman Emperor thought this way about the Mongols . . ."

[Bryn Hammond · Rating 2 out of 5]

Miserably out of date in its views. I have to wish this wasn't the standard history on the Mongols. In the 2nd edition of 2007 he adds a chapter with a survey of scholarship since the 1st edition of 1985. Read that, and see what a change there has been in our ideas. But he has "not tried to update the main text of this book to take account of what has been published since it was written". This means -- sorry -- his book mustn't be the standard history. The main text is quite negative, and the update makes that unjustified. Once or twice he even descends to caricature -- as a joke, but I just can't laugh.

That added chapter, a bibliographical one, can send you to a number of splendid books. I followed up on those and the horizons open... I think he admits himself, here, that his assessment of the Mongols in the main text looks very old-fashioned -- when he writes, "the subject now has a distinctly different feel to it."

The 'standard work' tag is self-perpetuating. There are others. For an introduction to the Mongols, I'd suggest this: The A to Z of the Mongol World Empire by Paul Buell.

Footnote: the bit of caricature. If you're curious, I mean this: Feeling his age, and realising that there were lands still to conquer and people yet left unmassacred, he enquired whether there was available any medicine of immortality. I've nothing against humour in scholarship. For this joke, however, I can make no excuse. It doesn't belong in a scholarly book. Couldn't he have struck that out of the 2nd edition, at least?

[Patricia · Rating 4 out of 5]

Janan Ganesh's column in the 1 January 2022 edition of the Financial Times was headed "Lessons at life's midpoint" and one of his list's well-thought through lessons as he turns 40, is a lesson I learned some time ago: "It is pointless to read one book on a subject. The knowledge won't stick unless reinforced with at least one other, read concurrently or straight after." On that basis, while at University, I never took a course without a corresponding or related course in another department simultaneously. As Ganesh notes, it helps make facts 'stick' and moreover, it balances out varying points-of-view.

David Morgan's The Mongols is a perfect example of why one mustn't read orphan volumes. More than one reader has been put off by his forthright declaration in the preface of this 'second edition' of his highly-lauded 1986 first edition, that he was "disinclined" to update the book for several (named) reasons. Hence, the main text remains unchanged, but a new chapter "The Mongol Empire since 1985" at the end covers the scholars and research that many felt should have been incorporated into a revised second edition. I can understand both parties, but if you have read (or will read) other volumes on the history of the Mongols, you can still benefit from this excellent 200-odd page introduction.

I admit to admiring Morgan's evaluations of other authors' takes on key issues within Mongol history, and his willingness to concede some points while maintaining others. An example concerning the controversial topic of 'the Great Yāsā of Chinggis Khan': "Suffice it to say that while I think I may have slightly overstated my case here and there [in his earlier volume], it still seems to me to be essentially valid. However, no less a scholar than de Rachewiltz disagrees...." (p. 191). I personally find such conversations refreshing, and they always provide me a list of 'next reads'.

So yes, there are bits and pieces that new research has now made redundant or questionable. For example, because I have read Ole Benedictow's excellent volume The Black Death 1346-1353, I frowned at Morgan's statement, "It is certainly true that the European Black Death originated in Mongol territory..." (p. 118), but didn't feel the need to dismiss the entire volume as outdated. (Benedictow's thorough research has proven that the Black Death did indeed affect the Mongols while they were besieging Kaffa in the Crimea, but they didn't bring it with them; they encountered it there.)

I also want to note that this is not a dry history and if I weren't retired, I would definitely put it on a student reading list. Any academic who can let down his hair now and then to add in a personal comment or observation that makes a reader smile, has earned a place on my bookshelf. Two examples: (1) Hülegü is not noted as merely executing al-Nāsir, but "ineffectively mark[ing] his vexation by having [him] executed." (p. 137) (2) In commenting on T. J. Barfield's position on why at times the Mongols resorted "to the desperate expedient of invading and conquering north China" (as opposed to just raiding them sporadically), he notes: "If Barfield is right--and for the most part, though possibly not in every instance, it seems to me that he is [here]...." (p. 190)

Dismissing this volume entirely on the basis of recent research would be the proverbial "tossing the baby out with the bath water" for Morgan's introduction to the Mongols remains a very worthwhile read, well deserving of a reprint. Just be sure to read that last chapter on updates and keep reading. The footnotes and bibliography are rich with recommendations.

[Brian Griffith · Rating 3 out of 5]

Morgan paints the history of the Mongolian people, showing how their ways of life rose, fell, and transformed. Naturally, much of the book focuses on the era of their greatest and most ruthless expansion, to establish an empire vastly more extensive than ancient Rome.

When the Mongols overran China, at first they practiced a traditional policy of killing males and children, and seizing the women and craftsmen. As Genghis Khan reportedly said, “its the greatest pleasure for a man to defeat his enemies and stamp them out ... take their pretty wives and concubines, and let them attend upon him in bed.” Basically, that is what the Mongol generals did to north China. Their early victories in the north featured massacres of Chinese men, and mass suicides of Chinese women. Some Mongol ministers recommended exterminating the whole population, taking all the people’s money, and using the land for horse pasture. But as the Mongols moved south wiser heads prevailed. Obviously more could be squeezed from living peasants than dead ones. So the conquered Chinese subjects gained an officially accepted right to exist except—as producers of revenue. In 1239 a merchant named ‘Abd Al-Rahman approached Ogedei Khan, and said if he was made chief tax-collector for north China, he could double the take. He won the contract. Under Mongol taxes, many farmers could not survive without over-exploiting their land. All told, due to war, famine or plague, the population of China seems to have dropped about 40 percent during the period of Mongol rule, from roughly 100 million to 60 million.

The Mongols brought in about 300,000 of their countrymen to oversee China. With such an administration, the traditional Confucian examination system for selecting government officials was suspended (until 1315). Like the Qin Legalists before them, the Mongols did not recognize any sources of authority other than military might.

The Mongol invasion was probably the nadir of relations between the Han Chinese and pastoralist “outsiders.” After that, perhaps Sino-Barbarian relations had nowhere to go but up. At least the Liao, Jin, and Mongol conquests forced the farmers and pastoralists to live together. By the reign of Qublai Khan, many Mongol officials had “declined” into adopting the sensibilities, tastes and scruples of the Chinese. The later transformation of Mongolian society into a Buddhist society heavily devoted to the monastic quest for inner peace must stand as one of the greatest changes of national culture in recorded history.

[J.D. Steens · Rating 3 out of 5]

The cover flap states that the Mongol Empire (AD 12-1300s) "was the largest continuous land empire known to history" (the British Empire was non-contiguous), stretching across a wide swath from the Pacific Ocean to eastern Europe. Competing-feuding nomadic tribes in Mongolia were united under the soon to be renamed Genghis Khan (the Great Khan), and territorial control expanded from there. The Mongol success was attributed to speed and mobility (horse); plunder, seize warfare and brutality (slaughter to intimidate as well as to overcome); organizational skill (rewarding merit; allowing belief systems of conquered people to continue). The empire was extended under the successors of Genghis Khan, including Kublai Khan (late 1200s) who became the emperor of China (Yuan dynasty). Due to successor rivalries among sons, brothers and uncles, the Mongol Empire broke up into largely independent territorial units (the Khanate of the Great Khan -- Mongolia-China); Khanate of the Golden Horde -- Russia, eastern Europe; the Ilkhanate -- Persia, middle east); and the Chaghtai Khanate -- Central Asia).

Trans-Asia trade routes were established across the Mongol Empire; Marco Polo's book the author says was "of course by far the best book written about the Mongol Empire." The European Black Death was thought to have spread from Mongol-held territory. Timur (Timur the lame), from the Chaghatai Khanate, conducted plundering raids in India and Delhi specifically. His descendant, Babur (d. 1530), who was a direct descendant of Genghis Khan and had strong ties to the Ilkhanate (Turkey, Persia), established the Moghul Empire in India.

The writing was packed with a lot of detail that tended to clutter the overall story. I watched a couple of YouTube videos on the history of the Mongol Empire and found these to be an easier-to-follow narrative.

[John Nelson · Rating 3 out of 5]

Through most of history, "barbarians" periodically erupted out of the Central Asian steppe or the deserts of the Middle East and overwhelmed their more settled neighbors. One of the last, and for a brief period of time the most successful, of these barbarian conquerors was the Mongol Empire under Chinghis Khan and his successors.

This book provides an overview of the major aspects of Mongol culture, including, of course, their military prowess. The Mongols traditionally were viewed as ruthless conquerors and murderers willing to shed copious amounts of blood when it suited their purposes. Since the 1970s, a revisionist view of a kinder, gentler (but not exactly kind and gentle) Mongol Empire has gained traction. The author of this book, David Morgan, though, leans toward the older view, and states that the Mongols refrained from the mass extermination of subject peoples only because those peoples could be taxed.

The weakness of this book, as is the case with any general survey of a broad topic, is that it does not provide much detail on any of the areas of Mongol life it examines. The Mongols, however, are an inherently interesting subject, making this book a worthwhile read.

[Erik Champenois · Rating 3 out of 5]

I read this after reading Jack Weatherford's somewhat novelized history books on Genghis Khan and the Mongol Queens. Morgan's book helped provide better context and historical analysis, and is especially valuable for its coverage of Persian sources on the Mongols. It does lack the stronger cultural/anthropological focus of Weatherford's books. The revised, updated edition also doesn't thoroughly revise the older chapters from the first edition - but instead leaves a new or extended chapter at the end to correct and elaborate on areas covered throughout the book. Still, a helpful overview of the Mongol period of world history, with chapters covering the Mongols in China, Russia, Persia and the Middle East, and Europe.

[Adam McPhee · Rating 4 out of 5]

A worthy overview of the Mongol empire from the time of Genghis Khan to its eventual collapse. The author makes it as straightforward as possible, which is no easy task: he points out that to study Mongol history, a scholar should be able to read Mongol, Persian and Chinese, the latter of which were the written languages of the empire. Plus there's plenty in Turkic, Arabic and Russian. Also, I think there's something like eleven ways to transliterate Mongolian names into English.

Occasionally lightened with a bit of dark humour.

[Garriguscarraig · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is an excellent introduction to the subject for the layperson, covering the broad sweep of the Mongol Empire(s) from about 1200-1400. Very well written, with a puckish sense of humor. I expect that once I finish the Saunders survey, these two books will have brought me from a near total ignorance on the topic to an ability to speak accurately on it, if only in broad terms. Highly recommended.

[Vitesh Shah · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book can be a very good introduction to overall mongol empire. I thought the first 10 percent of the book was written in quite an academic way, that means it had kind of a literature survey regarding mongol empire. This can be quite a dry part to read for many readers. Overall description of empire is quite good and interesting to read. The only problem I felt while reading the story is that the names of important mongol people being used are a bit different than in other sources. This makes following the timeline a bit difficult. I think this is a minor point. Overall the book is a great introduction and a starting point for further better reads.
Some highlights of the book are -
How mongol invasions affected the agriculture in Persia.
Overall mongol invasions were awful for many of the invaded places. However maybe at that time most of the invasions would have ended up being similar in scale of destruction.
Hazaras of Afghanistan are somewhat related to Mongols.
Herat was one of the richest cities of those times which was destroyed due to the invasions.
China was not so easy to conquer for the mongols.
The most interesting story - black death might have originated in mongol empire due to opening up of trade routes.
For me it is just amazing to see that Mongols also had military operations in present day Hungary.
Also the empire declined eventually due to infighting - the bane of every civilization or empire.

[Alexandra · Rating 4 out of 5]

Osviežujúce.
Nechápme sa zle Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World a Genghis Khan: Life, Death, and Resurrection sú z laického hľadiska obe dosť kvalitné diela (to druhé má oveľa viac detailných informácií o priebehu vojenských ťažení a zameriava sa najmä na osobu Genghisa; to prvé sa pozerá nielen na Genghisa, ale aj na jeho potomkov a osud bývalej ríše Mongolov dlho po jej rozpade) a hlavne sa ľahko čítajú. Dostanú vás do obrazu.

Navnadia, aby som to zhrnula najlepšie. Obe majú mnoho zdrojov a obaja autori sa vyznajú v Mongolsku i jeho reáliách (jeden je antropológ a obaja sú horliví cestovatelia). Čo sa dozviete v ich knihách v značnej "rozvláčnosti" a "kvetnatosti" sa tu v každom prípade nádherne zúročí.

David Morgan je totiž z tých 4 ľudí na svete, ktorí sa zaoberajú Mongolmi, Genghis (to vieš podľa toho, že by ma prefackal za tento spelling, Chinggis is the way, according to these learned dudes) Khánom a všetkým okolo toho. Ovláda perzštinu, a teda má moc dostať sa ku najkvetnatejšej literatúre vôbec - kronikám perzských historikov. Je to tiež človek, ktorý myslí na outsiderov a začiatočníkov v obore ako som ja - píše jednoducho a k veci.
Dieliky histórie zapadajú do seba s ľahkosťou puzzle pre batoľatá a vďaka neustálemu označovaniu, čo od ktorého učenca citoval/zistil vieš, kde hľadať doplňujúce info.
Taktiež sa ukázalo, že by som potrebovala 3 roky na prečítanie a hĺbkovú analýzu všetkého, čo som si z tejto knihy odniesla. ooops.

Mongolovia Davida Morgana sa rozdeľujú klasicky:
1. Prvopočiatok - pokec k tomu ako to v stepi fungovalo, a ktoré všetky frakcie museli v krutých podmienkach prežiť. Predstavenie najdôležitejších hráčov (Sing, Hsi-Hsia, apod), veliteľov, vtedajšej dynamiky doby.

2. Zrod Mesiáša - Genghisa. Pekne podložené jediným čisto mongolským zdrojom, ktorý sa zachoval a každý sa ho drží. Iná možnosť nie je. V každom prípade zistíš čo - to o ňom, a prejdeš na super dôležitý rok 1206 = boom! Vojenské výboje. Táto kniha ti bude pripomínať dôležitosť armády a nomádskeho spôsobu života veľmi často. Brace yourself.

Ďalej je to veľmi dobré delenie na rôzne časti vplyvu v dobytom impériu. Každé má svoju kapitolu, takže uvidíme každú stránku veci. Perzia, Čína a podobne. Dosť veľa pozornosti sa tiež venuje Európe a Rusku (viac než doteraz, minimálne). Máš tu ešte viac zdrojov a ak by niekomu bolo málo, autor vypísal bibliografiu, ktorú sa oplatí prečítať na tú ktorú časť impéria/tému. Super helpful 10/10

Stručne, jasne, výstižne napísané. Občas má David dosť suchý humor (tu a tam to veci vážne osviežilo) a dokázal zrozumiteľne podať udalosti, ktoré som občas nevedela pochopiť, keď som o nich kedysi čítala. Dokázal to vysvetliť často v jednom paragrafe. Kudos. Veľmi mi to pomohlo.

Takže ak máte mrte peňazí nazvyš, nechutne veľkú chuť dozvedieť sa o dejepisnej disciplíne, ktorú zase toľko ľudí neovláda ( lebo nie všetci sme linguist, cestovateľ a Sherlock Holmes v jednom) a záujem o pôvod dáždnika, hor sa! Táto kniha je veľmi fajn Introduction
(v mojom prípade Introduction: Introdution 03.)

[Max Renn · Rating 4 out of 5]

a concise overview of the rise and fall of the mongol empire. morgan's talent seems to be that of the DJ, for the most part content to contextualize a disparate body of historical record, but this approach serves him well and before you know it you've processed an amazing amount of knowledge about the mongols quite painlessly.

when i started the book i feared it was going to be a bit of an ordeal but morgan is generous with the anecdotal ( there is one concerning cats, swallows and chingiz khan that has fascinated me with its beauty and horror for weeks now) and he has a predilection for taking swipes at his fellow historians with a wry subtle wit. with this sort of mischief its easy to get through the dryer passages that can normally bog down serious analytical works such as this.

[Sam · Rating 3 out of 5]

David Morgan provides a solid overview of the history of the Mongols. His view is rather euro-centric with a noticeable emphasis on political history, leaving out much about "everyone else". However, he acknowledges these shortcomings and (in the second edition) provides an excellent last chapter reviewing the historiography since the first publication. Lastly, Morgan is excellent when it comes to qualifying (and disqualifying) primary sources, of which there are few. This practice, which he incorporates throughout the entire book, enables the reader to better trust his conclusions, as tentative as they may be. He writes for a non-expert, and as a result the book is very readable, avoiding an overdose of names and dates, the usual downfall for "the history of" books.

[Barış Özol · Rating 4 out of 5]

It is a good overview of the Mongols that covers from their rise, rule over and division into the various states including Golden Horde. Provides a good overview of the historiography and teaches an appreciation of the basic problem of Mongol history.

Through most of history lessons over the world, "barbarians" term periodically used to describe they erupted out of the Central Asian steppe East and overwhelmed their more settled neighbors. This book provides more understanding of the "barbarians" point of view rather than invaded countries point of view.

This is an excellent introduction to the subject for covering the broad sweep of the Mongol Empire from ~1200-1400. Very well written.

[Rock · Rating 3 out of 5]

This was a strange little book, most obviously because it is part of a series called "The Peoples of Europe" but is about a non-European people and largely ignores Europe. It has many fine qualities in addition to this, but the brevity of the book is a bit unsatisfying. However, I came away with the impression that there are many holes remaining in scholarship on the ancient Mongols, and from my limited research, there doesn't seem to be much better out there in terms of non-martial Mongol history.

[AskHistorians]

Absolutely standard text in the field. Gives an excellent grounding in the history of the Mongol Empire, although it is strongest when discussing Ilkhanate (A Mongol successor state based around Iran). Ideally read the second edition, his views evolved substantially between the first and second publication, he explains how and why his views have changed on the Mongol administration.

[Joona · Rating 5 out of 5]

Morgan writes read-ably and keeps the reader invested and interested throughout the book. The history of Chinggis Khan and Mongol empire is fascinating given their legacy isn't something we are reminded in our daily life. Morgan does a good job of rectifying this by delivering many nuggets of trivia of Mongol influence on the current state of our world.

[hari · Rating 4 out of 5]

really well-written and well-researched. the bibliography is a TODO list for anyone interested in learning more.

i read the newer edition of this book, which is published under the 'peoples of asia' series.

[Lee Broderick · Rating 3 out of 5]

Good overview of the Mongol period of Mongolian history, with a brief chapter on what came before.

[Davidagha]

apparently a bit outdated but a good intro

[Aislinn · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is ... a book that is hard to review. It is incredibly informative, examining the Mongol Empire as a whole from the Great Khanate in China to the Ilkhanate in Persia, but it is also obviously a work by a Mongol scholar for those who wish to become Mongol scholars.

Instead of new knowledge about the Mongols, I'm left with a sense of crushing despair at how little I know about medieval Persia, China, Russia, and Western Europe; this leads me straight to a frantic search for books on pre-Mongol world history, so that I can eventually come back to this book and actually understand it.

┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┄���┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅

As I said, this is a book for budding scholars of the Mongol Empire. Perhaps unsurprisingly, it has almost as much to say about the current state of medieval Mongolian studies as it does about the medieval Mongols themselves.

Of the book's nine chapters, two (three if we count the Introduction) are devoted to the scholarship on the Mongols. The first chapter sets out the available range of evidence, especially written records, from the various conquered cultures scattered across the vast empire, with a remarkably detailed breakdown of their long-dead authors' backgrounds and their consequent reliability (or lack thereof); the final chapter reports on works emerged since this book appeared, covering new findings, ongoing debates, and - at least in the second edition - both positive and negative responses to the book's first publication.

I find these parts to be the strongest of the book, informative but not overwhelming. In other words, they are unlike the actual content of the book on the Mongols, which is divided into sections mostly by geographical region, assumes knowledge of the history of all these regions both before and after the Mongol conquest, and talks about these regions when they were under Mongol rule according to a loose structure that is neither strictly chronological nor thematic.

As I close the book, my impression of the Mongol Empire remains as fuzzy as it was before I started. It remains just as difficult for me to tell you just what the heck happened during the reign of the Mongol Khans. To an extent, I might have learned more about how the Mongols were received by the peoples they conquered than about the Mongols themselves.

┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅

However, this confusion probably stems from my ignorance of the history of these regions immediately before this period. There should be no doubt about the breadth of information contained in the book. I particularly appreciate its focus on all four of the Mongol Khanates (though still mainly on the Ilkhanate, as this is a Peoples of Europe book, which means it is primarily concerned with Europe and its direct friends and enemies).

Of all the topics covered, I am most impressed by how interconnected our world was even then, in an era long before the Age of Discovery. During this period, China got the color palette for its trademark blue-and-white porcelain from Persia; Persia attempted a currency reform by issuing Chinese paper money (with Muslim characteristics); the Western Europeans and the Ilkhans negotiated enthusiastically a potential alliance against Mamluk Egypt; and, of course, all four Khanates and Europe facilitated unprecedented trade and travel between regions that had hitherto only been vaguely aware of each other's existence.

This interconnection becomes even more striking when we realize that the descendants of the Mongols directly founded the Timurid Empire of Central Asia and the Mughal Empire of South Asia, and the Mongols may or may not have inadvertently helped the founding of the Ottoman Empire. The butterfly effects and the resulting, sometimes almost ridiculous, coincidences in the history of our world are well-illustrated by the short but phenomenal existence of the Mongol Empire.

Once again, we are reminded that there is no "inevitability" in the rise or fall of any nation's fortunes; only the inevitability of the ever-continuing human exchanges between societies across the world, whether cultural, economic, or, indeed, military - all of which converge and collide to produce the rise or fall of nations around the globe, of both those directly involved in the exchanges and those physically distant but still undeniably ensnared in the web of human interaction.

┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅┄┅

In the end, I'm not sure if I would consider this a good introduction to the Mongol Empire for the layperson. I could, however, appreciate its value as a work that's well-researched, rigorouly-reviewed, and densely-informative. When it comes down to it, your experience of reading it will probably depend very much on how familiar you are with this period of history, especially that of Persia and Europe.

[Alex Lee · Rating 4 out of 5]

This subject is not one I know much about. The vast majority of the book covers the period during the Mongolian expansion across the globe, concentrating on specific characters who built and then split the Ghengis Khan's empire. Morgan does not deal much with those who came before or after, for some reason, which in my opinion he should because they are part of history, but that is probably due to a lack of records from the Mongolians themselves.

He is correct in that covering the Mongolians, who did not really have their own written history (they are written about by others, usually in a way that is really unflattering, or dismissive) requires a vast knowledge of scholarship that would be difficult for one person to acquire.

Morgan thus, focuses mainly on the Persian records, and what happened there. He then glosses over the aspects of history after the empire fragments and various branches die off, as these conquers had difficulty sustaining rule in an agricultural-bureaucratic style.

I think for what it has, this book is interesting, and well worth reading. It is not too long, and gives you a basis for understanding some of Mongolian history, although most of it is not recorded by the Mongolians themselves.

[Paul Black · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book would be great if you were already somewhat familiar with northern Asia in the 13th and 14th centuries. I got confused with Morgan's jumping back and forth, using more accurate but less familiar names (like Qubilai Khan and Chingiz Khan instead of Kubla and Genghis), carefully detailing the travels and writings of authors, and providing lots of research context (who published what, what is known and what is inferred, and the need to know several ancient languages to competently review some source materials). If you were planning to do further research into the Mongols or any of the areas they reached, this is a very readable reference. But for the casual historian, I cannot recommend it. The first couple of chapters are reviews of how we got our current information, which ancient writers wrote what tomes, and how they're available today. I appreciate his transparency, but it made it much harder to read.

He did provide genealogy charts of the great Khans in the back, and three maps in the front. I would have enjoyed a few more maps of the areas being focused on in each chapter within the chapter itself, for easier reference.

[James Ganey]

This book serves as an overview of the Mongol culture before, during, and after the Mongol Empire. There isn't much in the way of flavor or context or anything that a novelist would find endearing. This book has served me well as a reference text, and that is how it, and books like it, should be viewed. The story of history must be viewed from a scientific perspective, so looking for a narrative outside of the confines of the scientific method is not only unproveable, but dangerous to the fabric of history.

The flavor of reference texts is in the details that you pick up in between the saltine crackers of which person, son of someone, was at which battle at which time. You will not be interested in this book if you are dead-set on understanding the narratives that made up the lives of the empire's rulers. The person who wants this book is one who is interested in the grand picture of the Mongol Empire, how its culture, religion, government, and tactics changed based on new influences from foreign lands, what it represented to the world, and finally, how it is remembered and interpreted today.

[Readius Maximus · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book has a very academic approach which is good but since it was my first dip into Mongol history it was a bit much. If one is more familiar with Mongol history then this is probably a very fantastic book.

There was just so much I didn't know about this subject haha For instance that there were mongols living in Crimea up until Stalin after ww2 removed them. Or that the Uighurs and Khitans contributed to Mongol administrative culture. Or that the mongols held dinastic rule in part of China forming the Yuan empire. Or that the Golden Horde was the longest living Kingdom and was positioned on the Caspian sea. Or that Tamerlane, a devout Muslin, would have made Genghis himself cringe with his cruelty.