What do you think?
Rate this book
征服者與眾神：成吉思汗如何為蒙古帝國開創盛世
成吉思汗的宗教寬容政策，何以成為開創蒙古帝國盛世的關鍵？
自由貿易、知識共享、多元宗教、世俗法律、外交豁免權……成吉思汗打造的蒙古帝國，構築了現代世界的基礎。
蒙古帝國創建前，中國與歐洲未曾往來，而當成吉思汗去世時，世界兩端已藉由商貿與外交連成一氣，至今未斷。
「最會說故事」的人類學家魏澤福，費時五年，深入禁區，顛覆世人對於蒙古帝國的印象。
【內容說明】
從法國思想家伏爾泰寫下「暴躁易怒……良田因他而盡成荒野」的《中國孤兒》為始，原先藉成吉思汗諷刺法國君主的戲劇，反倒成了世人對成吉思汗及蒙古帝國負面印象的開端，「一心要將帝國的宏偉都城，變成遼闊的荒漠」、「不知宗教、道德、禮貌為何物，以打家劫舍為業。」此後相關戲劇、文學未曾斷絕。十九世紀的科學家更將蒙古人塑造為智力遲緩、殘暴的人種。二十世紀初，蘇聯封鎖了成吉思汗的出生之地為「大禁忌」，流放並殺害成吉思汗的後裔，從此，蒙古歷史幾乎淹沒於一片荒野之中。
數十年後，蘇聯解體，蒙古重獲自由，不僅「大禁忌」重新開放，就連佚失數百年的《蒙古祕史》也終於破譯。人類學家魏澤福，為了一探部落
416 pages, Kindle Edition
First published October 25, 2016
206 people are currently reading
2922 people want to read
About the author
Jack Weatherford
14 books746 followersJack McIver Weatherford is the DeWitt Wallace Professor of anthropology at Macalester College in Minnesota. He is best known for his 2004 book, Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World. In 2006, he was awarded the Order of the Polar Star, and the Order of Genghis Khan in 2022, Mongolia’s two highest national honors. Moreover, he was honoured with the Order of the Gran Mariscal de Ayacucho by the Government of Bolivia in 2014.
His books in the late 20th century on the influence of Native American cultures have been translated into numerous languages. In addition to publishing chapters and reviews in academic books and journals, Weatherford has published numerous articles in national newspapers to popularize his historic and anthropological coverage of Native American cultures, as well as the American political culture in Congress in the 20th century. In recent years, he has concentrated on the Mongols by looking at their impact since the time that Genghis Khan united the Mongol tribes in 1206.
His books in the late 20th century on the influence of Native American cultures have been translated into numerous languages. In addition to publishing chapters and reviews in academic books and journals, Weatherford has published numerous articles in national newspapers to popularize his historic and anthropological coverage of Native American cultures, as well as the American political culture in Congress in the 20th century. In recent years, he has concentrated on the Mongols by looking at their impact since the time that Genghis Khan united the Mongol tribes in 1206.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 118 reviews
November 14, 2024
In his discussion of Genghis Khan’s career, Gibbon inserted a small but provocative footnote, linking Genghis Khan to European philosophical ideas of tolerance and, surprisingly, to the religious freedom of the emerging United States.The journey of a thousand miles begins with but a single steppe. (sorry) In this case the author’s twelve-year sojourn began with a single footnote (among about eight thousand) in Edward Gibbon’s six-volume history of the Roman Empire. Was it possible that the notion of religious freedom that has been a hallmark of the United States since its inception as a nation (despite the many over the years, and even today, who seek to impose their religious views on the secular country) was inspired, at least in part, by the notorious Mongol conqueror? Well, as that famous champion of religious freedom, Sarah Palin, might say, “you betcha.”
Jack Weatherford From Macalaster College
The book is a Genghis Khan sandwich. The slice of bread at the bottom is the notion of GK having had an impact on America’s core value of freedom of religion. Did he or didn’t he? The slabs of meat in the sandwich would be the extensive look at GK’s life, accomplishments, and laws. And finish up with the covering bread slice that brings the analysis to a close. I suppose one might, alternatively, see it as being structured like a mystery. Present an initial notion (instead of a crime) and then look for clues that might offer evidence, whether confirming or exculpatory. Finish up with a Miss Marple-ish, Poirot-ish, or Sam Spade-ish explanation that connects the elements for a final understanding of where the truth lies.
Omar Sharif in the lead of the 1965 film, Genghis Khan - from Dusted Off
Genghis Khan and the Quest for God makes for a very meaty sandwich. It is so meaty in fact that you might forget the initial question of impact on US history and get lost in the biographical details. It is not a straight-up biography of, arguably, the greatest conqueror the world has ever seen. The Secret History of the Mongols, written soon after GK’s passing was that, and provides a major resource for this book. Weatherford has made it a major portion of his life’s work to study GK, and ferret out how his Olympian accomplishments have influenced the world. His best known book, Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World, published in 2004, looked at how the Mongol empire might have influenced European civilization. It was a NY Times best-seller, taking on the popular view of GK as a barbarian, showing him as a wise ruler, if brutal warrior, whose innovations were significant in fueling the European Renaissance. In this work, Weatherford puts on a different set of lenses and focuses on how spiritual beliefs helped mold Genghis and how he changed the way nation-states did, or at least could deal with religion. We get the biography but also a consideration of what the extant belief systems were during his life, and what he took from them.
As a child I became engrossed in reading about Marco Polo, Kublai Khan, Genghis Khan and developed a fascination with Mongolia. In college I tried to go to Mongolia to continue that interest, but the Cold War prevented it. I put aside that interest and continued with others that I had, but when Mongolia opened in the 1990's I went to visit more out of curiousity than for any planned work. Once there, the passion of my childhood flamed higher than ever. Although I did not speak the language I felt spiritually, intellectually and emotionally at home. - from the Asia East interview
Tadanobu Asano’s GK in the film Mongol - from Metroactive.com
I came to this book with little knowledge of Genghis Khan, so it was eye-opening for me. Definitely brain-candy. Khan’s quest was not merely for ever-greater swaths of real estate. He was also very interested in examining the religions of all the peoples he conquered, as well as the religions of other nations, and ferreting out the wisdom from the BS. He was a sincerely religious individual, with a belief system that might find plenty of resonance with seekers of truth in the 21st century. The guy was truly interested in finding out whatever underlying truths each religion might offer.
Odnyam Odsuren - Temujin as a boy in Mongol - from Movie-roulette.com
The book follows GK from when he was a boy named Temujin, practically an orphan. We see his initial acts of brutality. Do not, I repeat not, pick on that Temujin kid. We see his stepwise rise to power, and gain an appreciation for the lessons he learns along the way. As well as presenting the spiritual elements that impressed the boy and later the man we learn a lot about the family and community structures and values of diverse groups during the sixty-some-odd years of GK’s life. (1162 to 1227). We see him adopt a standard written language for his empire, practice relative meritocracy in managing his widespread lands, unite diverse nomadic tribes, through alliances and conquest, encourage trade along the now stable Silk Road, and implement a core notion of freedom of religion. Some barbarian! Of course, that whole genocide thing puts a crimp in the rosier view one might have of Ghenghis. Of course, it may have been somewhat exaggerated by the history writers of antiquity as well, as it was their class of people GK looked to eliminate when conquering new territory. Still, fairly barbarous, but barbarity is pretty much the only image many of us might have of him. There was clearly a lot more to Khan than wrath.
John Wayne as a cowboy GK in The Conqueror (1956) - from Media Pathfinder
The only quibble I have with the book may better described as whining. There are a lot, a serious lot of names to try keeping track of here. It may take a village to raise a child, but one does not necessarily need to know the name of every villager. Ditto here. While there are many names to track, the arc of the story will flow along just fine if you only latch on to a few. One thing the encyclopedic name inclusion does is make the book a slower read than it might have been. On the other hand, the actual hardcover text takes up only 362 pages, so it falls far short of tome. And if you spare yourself the form of self-mortification I indulge in while reading, that being writing down every name I come across, it should be a much quicker read for you than it was for me.
The standard image of GK - from BBC
Genghis Khan and the Quest for God was an eye-opening read, introducing as a real person what had been a stick-figure character of myth, to me, anyway. Weatherford offers a persuasive case for GK’s implementation of religious freedom having had an impact on the American founders. But, as with mysteries, we know that the final explanation is only a part of the joy. The bulk is in the characters, the settings and the language. So too with this. Whether you buy Weatherford’s argument for GK’s influence on the newborn USA or not, the journey through the life of Genghis Khan is worth the price of admission. Go ahead, conquer your ignorance. Lay waste your lack of knowledge about GK. This book is bloody fascinating.
Review first posted – 11/24/16
Publication date – 10/15/16
The folks at Viking sent this book, along with some goats and a few horses, in return for an honest review.
=============================EXTRA STUFF
The film Mongol, on Youtube, covers the earlier portion of GK’s life and is quite beautiful to look at. Liberties are taken with history, but it is a treat.
Videos
----- Jack Weatherford speaks about Genghis Khan at Embry-Riddle Honors Series – 1:15:05
-----A nice undergrad lecture - The Mongol Impact on World History by Ed Vajda – 52:29
----- Genghis Khan - Great Khan Of The Mongol Empire And Great Destroyer - a kitschy documentary that looks at GK from a psychological perspective, among other things, follows the tracks of an ancient book about GK, The Secret History - from Documentary Lab
----- BBC Genghis Khan
----- Mongol – the full movie – 1:56:34
-----Captain Kirk goes monosyllabic - Khan!
The Wrestler Princess - a fascinating telling by Weatherford of a Mongolian princess selecting a mate – from Lapham’s Quarterly
A 2008 interview with Weatherford – by Daniel White for Asia East – this is a very slight interview
There is variation in how Genghis Khan is pronounced. Is the initial G hard, as in goal, or soft as in gypsy? It is the latter, with maybe a tilt toward a "ch" as in cha-cha. What is surprising is that Khan is actually pronounced like Han, as in Han Solo. The Wikipedia page for GK includes a pronunciation app so you can hear it.
November 13, 2020
”As soon as one conflict subsided, people of faith easily invented another excuse to make war against nonbelievers, pagans, and heretics, or whatever they called people of other religions. In the name of a peaceful and compassionate God, the religiously devout found it easy to torture, rob, beat, blind, rape, burn, drown, starve, dismember, or enslave anyone. From infanticide to genocide, no punishment was too great or too evil when directed against someone perceived as a danger to the true religion. Such killing was not a sin; it become a sacred duty, a sacrament that promised the killer eternal rewards.”
Genghis Khan
Recently, I read Gore Vidal’s novel on the 4th century Roman Emperor Julian, who attempted to bring back the old multi-God pagan system in a world that had become dominated by Christianity. Julian was not interested in replacing Christianity, but merely wanted to allow his subjects the opportunity to worship they way they wanted to worship. It was an attempt at religious tolerance that died with him on the battlefield in Mesopotamia. In fact, Jack Weatherford, the author of this book, mentions Julian as the last time religious tolerance was attempted until the rise of Genghis Khan in the 13th century.
If you practically gave yourself whiplash with the words religious tolerance being said in association with Genghis Khan, you are not alone. My neck is still a bit sore from my own reaction. If I were asked to make a list of famous barbarians, Genghis Khan would be at the top of the list. After reading this book, he might still be on that list but with an asterix. He was ruthless, but he forbade torture. He found it to be a disgusting practice and would put anyone to death who had participated in torturing another human being. He saw himself as a liberator. ”’The great ones among you have committed these sins,’ he explained.’If you ask me what proof I have for these words, I say it is because I am the punishment of God. If you have not committed any sins, God would not have sent a punishment like me upon you.’”
Genghis was not devout. He studied all the religions he encountered, but found solace in none of them. He was spiritual rather than religious. His idea of communing with something greater than himself was to climb a mountain, fast, and raise his arms up to the sun and the heavens. After conquering a region, he would generally leave the priests of whatever religion was most prevalent in charge. They were usually the best educated people and best equipped to govern in his absence. Genghis always had a new conquest to pursue and did not want to mire himself down in local politics. He, at times, fought wars on four fronts. The only other time that has happened in world history was when the United States fought on multiple fronts in World War Two.
He was very clear to the priests he left in charge that they were to remain loyal to him and allow anyone to practice whatever religion they wished. If they defied him on either of those fronts, his punishment would be swift and brutal. A few did try, and in some of those cases, he leveled the city and killed and enslaved the population. He treated any religious extremism with the contempt it deserved and killed those who persisted in persecuting those who wished to worship differently than themselves.
There is a barbarian hidden under those silk robes. To him, he wasn’t being barbaric; he was just keeping the peace and protecting the beliefs of all people.
He encouraged his sons to marry Christian women because he felt they made good mothers for his grandchildren. Women were allowed to inherit and own property. His own wives were left to govern many regions with complete autonomy to do what they thought was best. These Christian women became very powerful. He saw no reason why women couldn’t be the supreme leader, and after his death, there were points where women were in charge of the Mongols. He was so progressive in his thinking, and part of his objective by conquering was to create peace.
”Genghis Khan invented himself from the page of his own mind.”
I love it when I read a book, and it completely changes my mind about how I see a historical figure or a historical event. I certainly had no idea of the type of society that Genghis Khan created from the ashes and blood of his conquests. All I knew was that he butchered a lot of people and spread fear and chaos wherever he went. He did those things, but with the goal of uniting everyone under one banner by eliminating religious intolerance and encouraging diverse people to work together to build a society where all had what they needed, and strangely enough, that war would prove unnecessary.
Did his ideas survive him? I’m afraid not. His sons squabbled over the empire, though they continued to be successful at adding more territory to the empire. Things continued to unravel until his grandson Kublai Khan was strong enough to bring the Mongol Empire back together. Genghis Khan came from the humblest beginnings and, by the force of his will, became one of the most powerful leaders on the planet. It is still baffling, given his upbringing, how he became so progressive. I have to believe he was a genius at leadership. He could see beyond preconceived notions and build a society based on tolerance.
”He did not die as a Buddhist, Muslim, Christian, Taoist, or disciple of any one religion. He died a Mongol. After carefully observing each of the religions known to him and after long conversations with both genuine and fake holy men, he did not condemn any of these faiths, yet neither did he find comfort in any of them.”
If you wish to see more of my most recent book and movie reviews, visit http://www.jeffreykeeten.com
I also have a Facebook blogger page at: https://www.facebook.com/JeffreyKeeten
Genghis Khan
Recently, I read Gore Vidal’s novel on the 4th century Roman Emperor Julian, who attempted to bring back the old multi-God pagan system in a world that had become dominated by Christianity. Julian was not interested in replacing Christianity, but merely wanted to allow his subjects the opportunity to worship they way they wanted to worship. It was an attempt at religious tolerance that died with him on the battlefield in Mesopotamia. In fact, Jack Weatherford, the author of this book, mentions Julian as the last time religious tolerance was attempted until the rise of Genghis Khan in the 13th century.
If you practically gave yourself whiplash with the words religious tolerance being said in association with Genghis Khan, you are not alone. My neck is still a bit sore from my own reaction. If I were asked to make a list of famous barbarians, Genghis Khan would be at the top of the list. After reading this book, he might still be on that list but with an asterix. He was ruthless, but he forbade torture. He found it to be a disgusting practice and would put anyone to death who had participated in torturing another human being. He saw himself as a liberator. ”’The great ones among you have committed these sins,’ he explained.’If you ask me what proof I have for these words, I say it is because I am the punishment of God. If you have not committed any sins, God would not have sent a punishment like me upon you.’”
Genghis was not devout. He studied all the religions he encountered, but found solace in none of them. He was spiritual rather than religious. His idea of communing with something greater than himself was to climb a mountain, fast, and raise his arms up to the sun and the heavens. After conquering a region, he would generally leave the priests of whatever religion was most prevalent in charge. They were usually the best educated people and best equipped to govern in his absence. Genghis always had a new conquest to pursue and did not want to mire himself down in local politics. He, at times, fought wars on four fronts. The only other time that has happened in world history was when the United States fought on multiple fronts in World War Two.
He was very clear to the priests he left in charge that they were to remain loyal to him and allow anyone to practice whatever religion they wished. If they defied him on either of those fronts, his punishment would be swift and brutal. A few did try, and in some of those cases, he leveled the city and killed and enslaved the population. He treated any religious extremism with the contempt it deserved and killed those who persisted in persecuting those who wished to worship differently than themselves.
There is a barbarian hidden under those silk robes. To him, he wasn’t being barbaric; he was just keeping the peace and protecting the beliefs of all people.
He encouraged his sons to marry Christian women because he felt they made good mothers for his grandchildren. Women were allowed to inherit and own property. His own wives were left to govern many regions with complete autonomy to do what they thought was best. These Christian women became very powerful. He saw no reason why women couldn’t be the supreme leader, and after his death, there were points where women were in charge of the Mongols. He was so progressive in his thinking, and part of his objective by conquering was to create peace.
”Genghis Khan invented himself from the page of his own mind.”
I love it when I read a book, and it completely changes my mind about how I see a historical figure or a historical event. I certainly had no idea of the type of society that Genghis Khan created from the ashes and blood of his conquests. All I knew was that he butchered a lot of people and spread fear and chaos wherever he went. He did those things, but with the goal of uniting everyone under one banner by eliminating religious intolerance and encouraging diverse people to work together to build a society where all had what they needed, and strangely enough, that war would prove unnecessary.
Did his ideas survive him? I’m afraid not. His sons squabbled over the empire, though they continued to be successful at adding more territory to the empire. Things continued to unravel until his grandson Kublai Khan was strong enough to bring the Mongol Empire back together. Genghis Khan came from the humblest beginnings and, by the force of his will, became one of the most powerful leaders on the planet. It is still baffling, given his upbringing, how he became so progressive. I have to believe he was a genius at leadership. He could see beyond preconceived notions and build a society based on tolerance.
”He did not die as a Buddhist, Muslim, Christian, Taoist, or disciple of any one religion. He died a Mongol. After carefully observing each of the religions known to him and after long conversations with both genuine and fake holy men, he did not condemn any of these faiths, yet neither did he find comfort in any of them.”
If you wish to see more of my most recent book and movie reviews, visit http://www.jeffreykeeten.com
I also have a Facebook blogger page at: https://www.facebook.com/JeffreyKeeten
November 16, 2016
My knowledge of Genghis Khan derives mostly from having watched, once and long ago, the Howard Hughes-produced film The Conqueror, starring John Wayne. Yes, that John Wayne. The one from Iowa. Playing the great Mongolian leader. Wooing Susan Hayward. Just like in the history books. The tagline from the movie poster is: I fight. I love. I conquer…like a Barbarian! (Reviewer's Note: Ditto). It goes almost without saying that The Conqueror frequently pops up on lists of the worst movies ever made. Accordingly, my Khan-related knowledge is best expressed utilizing negative numbers.
It was thus with some excitement that I opened Jack Weatherford’s Genghis Khan and the Quest for God. Weatherford is a Mongolian specialist, an expert in the field, and has written two other well-received books about Genghis Khan and his people. I wanted the knowledge this book promised.
I also had some trepidation.
That trepidation comes from the subtitle: “How the World’s Greatest Conqueror Gave Us Religious Freedom.” Like I said, I don’t know anything about Genghis Khan. (Except that he probably didn't look like John Wayne). However, I know a few things about history. I know, first and foremost, that “religious freedom” (however that is defined) was never given to “us” (however that is defined) by any one person, and certainly not the Great Khan of the Steppe. Before getting to the first page, my BS detectors were quivering. Still, I kept an open mind. A good subtitle, after all, is designed to do two things: first, get your attention; and second, mislead you terribly. Using that metric, this subtitle is perfect.
Weatherford himself does not seem to take the claim very seriously (leading me to believe that, as if often the case, the cover copy did not come from the author). In his introductory preface, Weatherford notes that he came upon the idea for this book in a footnote he found in Gibbon’s The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. According to him, the footnote traced a lineage between Genghis Khan, enlightened European philosophy, and the emergence of religious tolerance in America. Weatherford expounds on this a bit, attempting to link Genghis Khan with Thomas Jefferson. The claim seems outlandish, but after much research…Well, as Weatherford admits, all his research failed to provide the missing link.
This didn't seem to bother him much, and really, I sensed Weatherford simply rationalizing another book on the Mongols. So I continued reading, a bit perplexed, to be sure, yet hopeful he would not spend the next 356 pages of text proving something that can’t be proven, and is actually quite untrue.
With the unfortunate preface out of the way, Weatherford delivers what I wanted all along: a competent and readable biography about Genghis Khan.
Genghis Khan and the Quest for God divides Genghis’ life into four section. The first covers his early life, as a boy known as Temujin. This was a time of struggle, his father murdered, his mother banished. His “quest for God” got off to a pretty rocky start when he murdered his half-brother.
Weatherford next follows Genghis as he unifies the nomadic tribes into the Mongolian empire. It’s a complex tale of loyalty and betrayal and blood brothers turned sworn enemies. Reading this, I got a pretty good sense where George R.R. Martin’s came up with the Dothraki.
The third section covers Genghis as conqueror, as his armies invade a multitude of lands, including vast portions of present-day China, Russia, India, and the Middle East. The final quarter is devoted to the gradual devolution of the Mongols following Genghis’ death. Despite strong leadership from his female heirs, the empire eventually unraveled amid internal power struggles and disputes over succession.
Weatherford writes in a very engaging style. He does a good job balancing a fast-paced narrative with keen analysis. I appreciated how he discussed sources within the text, something that is extremely important when you are dealing with long-ago events and limited extant documents. Like I said, I’m a newcomer to the subject, but I never felt like Weatherford was writing over my head. I sense that this will appeal broadly to both newbies and Genghis-philes alike.
His scope is wide-ranging. He does an excellent job covering the social, political, and of course religious traditions of the Mongols. It should be noted that this is not a military history. For the most part, Genghis Khan’s campaigns are only mentioned, not reconstructed. Indeed, the only real military adventure Weatherford details is the invasion of the Khwarizm empire. As the title suggests, Weatherford is more interested in Genghis Khan’s curiosity about, and tolerance of, the various religious factions his empire subsumed. The Mongol invasions brought within their ambit Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, and Taoists. Genghis Khan’s challenge was to maintain an equilibrium between these competing factions.
Weatherford never really picks up the thread of the preface in an attempt to prove that Genghis endowed religious freedom on the world in general or America in particular. This is the right call, because (as I mentioned above) it wouldn’t be true. First, the notion of religious tolerance did not come from any one person, and certainly not Genghis Khan. It was utilized by other emperors (such as Alexander) who came before him and saw the value in such compromise. It also sprang from enlightenment ideals, as Weatherford notes. Second, and not for nothing, it’s impossible to define what “religious freedom” means, much less treat it as a fully articulated and well-polished heirloom to be passed on from one to another. When you look at the changing interpretations of the First Amendment, it becomes silly – at best – to attribute any of it to a 13th century warrior-king, however interested he might have been in comparative religions.
That does not detract from this book in the least. Weatherford’s great contribution is to paint a portrait of Genghis Khan that restores his complex humanity. This is a far different vision than the Khan we’re used to, whether he’s being portrayed by John Wayne in a terrible film, or getting a cameo in the cinematic masterpiece that is Bill and Ted’s Excellent Adventure. Genghis Khan has often been defined by his enemies, and so comes to us as a violent and rapacious savage. He was a killer, to be sure, and Weatherford at times downplays this simply by his shift in emphasis from his military endeavors to his spiritual quest. That said, Weatherford makes a genuine effort to fill in his other attributes. The Genghis Khan that emerges in these pages is far more than the bringer of death. He is given credit for an inquisitive and supple mind, a visionary of sorts, who ruled his empire with a deft hand. That makes Genghis Khan and the Quest for God worth a read.
(I received a copy of this book from the publisher in exchange for an honest review)
It was thus with some excitement that I opened Jack Weatherford’s Genghis Khan and the Quest for God. Weatherford is a Mongolian specialist, an expert in the field, and has written two other well-received books about Genghis Khan and his people. I wanted the knowledge this book promised.
I also had some trepidation.
That trepidation comes from the subtitle: “How the World’s Greatest Conqueror Gave Us Religious Freedom.” Like I said, I don’t know anything about Genghis Khan. (Except that he probably didn't look like John Wayne). However, I know a few things about history. I know, first and foremost, that “religious freedom” (however that is defined) was never given to “us” (however that is defined) by any one person, and certainly not the Great Khan of the Steppe. Before getting to the first page, my BS detectors were quivering. Still, I kept an open mind. A good subtitle, after all, is designed to do two things: first, get your attention; and second, mislead you terribly. Using that metric, this subtitle is perfect.
Weatherford himself does not seem to take the claim very seriously (leading me to believe that, as if often the case, the cover copy did not come from the author). In his introductory preface, Weatherford notes that he came upon the idea for this book in a footnote he found in Gibbon’s The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. According to him, the footnote traced a lineage between Genghis Khan, enlightened European philosophy, and the emergence of religious tolerance in America. Weatherford expounds on this a bit, attempting to link Genghis Khan with Thomas Jefferson. The claim seems outlandish, but after much research…Well, as Weatherford admits, all his research failed to provide the missing link.
This didn't seem to bother him much, and really, I sensed Weatherford simply rationalizing another book on the Mongols. So I continued reading, a bit perplexed, to be sure, yet hopeful he would not spend the next 356 pages of text proving something that can’t be proven, and is actually quite untrue.
With the unfortunate preface out of the way, Weatherford delivers what I wanted all along: a competent and readable biography about Genghis Khan.
Genghis Khan and the Quest for God divides Genghis’ life into four section. The first covers his early life, as a boy known as Temujin. This was a time of struggle, his father murdered, his mother banished. His “quest for God” got off to a pretty rocky start when he murdered his half-brother.
Weatherford next follows Genghis as he unifies the nomadic tribes into the Mongolian empire. It’s a complex tale of loyalty and betrayal and blood brothers turned sworn enemies. Reading this, I got a pretty good sense where George R.R. Martin’s came up with the Dothraki.
The third section covers Genghis as conqueror, as his armies invade a multitude of lands, including vast portions of present-day China, Russia, India, and the Middle East. The final quarter is devoted to the gradual devolution of the Mongols following Genghis’ death. Despite strong leadership from his female heirs, the empire eventually unraveled amid internal power struggles and disputes over succession.
Weatherford writes in a very engaging style. He does a good job balancing a fast-paced narrative with keen analysis. I appreciated how he discussed sources within the text, something that is extremely important when you are dealing with long-ago events and limited extant documents. Like I said, I’m a newcomer to the subject, but I never felt like Weatherford was writing over my head. I sense that this will appeal broadly to both newbies and Genghis-philes alike.
His scope is wide-ranging. He does an excellent job covering the social, political, and of course religious traditions of the Mongols. It should be noted that this is not a military history. For the most part, Genghis Khan’s campaigns are only mentioned, not reconstructed. Indeed, the only real military adventure Weatherford details is the invasion of the Khwarizm empire. As the title suggests, Weatherford is more interested in Genghis Khan’s curiosity about, and tolerance of, the various religious factions his empire subsumed. The Mongol invasions brought within their ambit Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, and Taoists. Genghis Khan’s challenge was to maintain an equilibrium between these competing factions.
Weatherford never really picks up the thread of the preface in an attempt to prove that Genghis endowed religious freedom on the world in general or America in particular. This is the right call, because (as I mentioned above) it wouldn’t be true. First, the notion of religious tolerance did not come from any one person, and certainly not Genghis Khan. It was utilized by other emperors (such as Alexander) who came before him and saw the value in such compromise. It also sprang from enlightenment ideals, as Weatherford notes. Second, and not for nothing, it’s impossible to define what “religious freedom” means, much less treat it as a fully articulated and well-polished heirloom to be passed on from one to another. When you look at the changing interpretations of the First Amendment, it becomes silly – at best – to attribute any of it to a 13th century warrior-king, however interested he might have been in comparative religions.
That does not detract from this book in the least. Weatherford’s great contribution is to paint a portrait of Genghis Khan that restores his complex humanity. This is a far different vision than the Khan we’re used to, whether he’s being portrayed by John Wayne in a terrible film, or getting a cameo in the cinematic masterpiece that is Bill and Ted’s Excellent Adventure. Genghis Khan has often been defined by his enemies, and so comes to us as a violent and rapacious savage. He was a killer, to be sure, and Weatherford at times downplays this simply by his shift in emphasis from his military endeavors to his spiritual quest. That said, Weatherford makes a genuine effort to fill in his other attributes. The Genghis Khan that emerges in these pages is far more than the bringer of death. He is given credit for an inquisitive and supple mind, a visionary of sorts, who ruled his empire with a deft hand. That makes Genghis Khan and the Quest for God worth a read.
(I received a copy of this book from the publisher in exchange for an honest review)
March 26, 2017
Genghis Khan was a baaad man...if you were a shitty ruler who oppressed your people and lived fat off the sweat of those less fortunate.
Jack Weatherford knows his subject inside and out. He's written numerous books on the Mongols and the khan in particular. He did an excellent job in helping me garner a better understanding of perhaps the greatest ruler of all time.
Genghis Khan and the Quest for God: How the World's Greatest Conqueror Gave Us Religious Freedom succeeds in portraying Genghis Khan as a man to be admired for his ability to gracefully accept the religious beliefs of our cultures and nations when he had absolutely no need to. In fact, it would seem to behoove him to squash the beliefs of all who came under his power, if for no other reason than to have uniformity of belief under his sway entirely.
Instead, this man had the wisdom and foresight to allow the people he subjugated to retain their believes, whatever they may be. That did away with the necessity of fighting a secondary religious war with highly fanatical partisans.
As I was flying through these pages I was remained of a modern day parallel that may help you understand the kind of ruler Genghis Khan was. Think Khaleesi from Game of Thrones. Both are warlike and brutally slaughtered many, but both brought about freedom for the previously oppressed. Yes, I'm drawing on fantasy fiction for an analogy, but hey, the legendary stories that make up Genghis Khan's life seem like they have to be the stuff of some master writer's wild imagination.
Jack Weatherford knows his subject inside and out. He's written numerous books on the Mongols and the khan in particular. He did an excellent job in helping me garner a better understanding of perhaps the greatest ruler of all time.
Genghis Khan and the Quest for God: How the World's Greatest Conqueror Gave Us Religious Freedom succeeds in portraying Genghis Khan as a man to be admired for his ability to gracefully accept the religious beliefs of our cultures and nations when he had absolutely no need to. In fact, it would seem to behoove him to squash the beliefs of all who came under his power, if for no other reason than to have uniformity of belief under his sway entirely.
Instead, this man had the wisdom and foresight to allow the people he subjugated to retain their believes, whatever they may be. That did away with the necessity of fighting a secondary religious war with highly fanatical partisans.
As I was flying through these pages I was remained of a modern day parallel that may help you understand the kind of ruler Genghis Khan was. Think Khaleesi from Game of Thrones. Both are warlike and brutally slaughtered many, but both brought about freedom for the previously oppressed. Yes, I'm drawing on fantasy fiction for an analogy, but hey, the legendary stories that make up Genghis Khan's life seem like they have to be the stuff of some master writer's wild imagination.
July 30, 2018
Jack Weatherford’s standing among historians has improved. In recent books by newer scholars I see him used and referenced without comment. Others are still averse: Morris Rossabi – whose work on the Mongols in China itself broke down prejudices and saw with new eyes – makes snipey remarks about the influence of Weatherford in forwards and prefaces, from the 2nd edition of his Khubilai Khan: His Life and Times, 20th Anniversary Edition, With a New Preface in 2009 to How Mongolia Matters: War, Law, and Society in 2017.
There are reasons for this.
One, Weatherford was an anthropologist. Historians can be resistant to other disciplines, to interdisciplinary perspectives, sadly. To my disenchantment I’ve found this out myself with literary criticism: so much to offer to the study of history, yet I’ve seen non-acceptance, even hostility. Anthropology, like literary studies, has a huge amount to offer history, and Mongol history specifically.
Two, when Weatherford prepared himself to write about Mongols, he began to learn Mongolian (he says it took him ten years to reach proficiency). Whereas received wisdom among Mongolists has said you need to learn Chinese, Persian, and six other languages but ‘funnily enough’ (actual quote), Mongolian is the one language you don’t need to learn, because (roughly quoted) there’s nothing in it. Well, Weatherford still relies on translations for the Persian and Chinese sources etc., and to historians this is the mark of a popular historian, a populariser. Actually he isn’t what we call a populariser (of academic work), because although he wrote for a wide audience from the start, his content has original investigation and interpretation – none more than in this book. And Weatherford constantly talks up new Mongolian scholarship, expresses the hope that his tentative ideas will be quickly superseded by young Mongolian scholars. That’s his answer to ‘knows Mongolian, doesn’t know the languages of the usual sources’.
But one effect may be obvious: if you dwell always in the Persian and Chinese sources, and Armenian and Latin – the languages of conquered peoples and other enemies of the Mongols – you’re going to escape with difficulty from their negative slant. Mongol Studies in the 21st century has found its way out of that negative slant and shed a lot of prejudice. But you can see that history being written by the losers in this case has been the main problem and remains one. Meanwhile you’ve probably heard what a resurgence Chinggis Khaan enjoys in his own country and how positively they view him. So Weatherford, reading Mongolian, and now residing in Mongolia, fairly inevitably still startles the publishing world with his positivity. He’s coming from a Mongolian place. And that may need a pinch of salt. But you know what else needs salt, like silos of it? The arrogance in that ‘except Mongolian, which you don’t need to learn – nothing’s written in it’. The dismissal of Mongolian scholarship as too positive. As if scholars in the UK, US, Australia, do not do exactly the same with their main nation-building figures. It is a struggle in these places to see and present to the public the bad side of your own history. Let’s not have the double standards to lecture Mongolians about that. When the qualifications have been ‘to learn every language except Mongolian’, how are Western scholars to know what goes on in Mongolian, anyway? Things they may have been missing, Weatherford brings to attention, and this too makes his books seem odd to them.
Onto the book. It is rich in sources, like Weatherford’s others but increasingly. Often these are Mongolian histories written in the 16th, 17th, and on to the 19th centuries. The 16th-17th century histories are post-Buddhist conversion and re-mythologise in Buddhist terms. This means they are often left aside as anachronistic, but Weatherford quotes them as part of the story of how Mongols have remembered Chinggis and told his legend. He then speaks of the European and American 18th century, when Genghis (known as Zingis then or else Genghiscan the Great) was re-discovered, before the 19th century kicked in with its race science that made Europeans despise Asians in new ways. Much of the European 18th century material is laudatory of Zingis and fascinated by his achievements – more impressive than Alexander, in war and peace, was not an uncommon thing to say (you don’t expect to hear that post-19th century, do you, that Genghis was a better man than Alexander?). There is a gulf in treatment of him between the 18th century and us, and I can only explain the change by 19th century race science. And perhaps by the 20th century world wars, but that’s another argument. Quest for God’s subtitle is overblown for me, but Weatherford’s text does not make gigantic claims: mostly he points out the fashion for Zingis in the 18thC and how the Mongols got drawn into the idea of religious freedom of conscience, awakening in Europe at that time. Here was a practical, operating example of a government over many faiths succeeding with a policy of religious toleration and plurality. Gibbon has a famous sentence but he wasn’t on his own. The focus on how Genghis brought ‘religious freedom’ isn’t Weatherford’s, it’s the European and American 18th century’s.
The book is both a history of religions before, in and around the Mongol Empire, and a spiritual biography of Genghis Khan. The best conventional biography is Michal Biran, Chinggis Khan. Bad ones are legion. Weatherford’s (what else?) is an unconventional biography, an attempt to piece together his inner life, particularly around beliefs, morality, conduct, and explanations of the world – the ‘religious’ issues. As usual with a Weatherford book, I find a hundred places to discuss or disagree, but the point is, nobody else even tries to write an inner-life biography. And yet we have the materials.
One regret. I wish he wouldn’t use ‘nation’ for the Mongol ulus or whatever, in the way he does. ‘Nation’ is too 19th-century and cannot escape an ethnic flavour unless he makes plain at every turn (in my favourite quote from In the Service of the Khan: Eminent Personalities of the Early Mongol-Yüan Period):
The Mongol conquest was more than merely a Mongol affair. From the start, it was a grand enterprise in which a galaxy of personages from many races and cultures participated, but always under Mongol leadership... The enlistment by the Mongols of so many people of such diverse backgrounds in one grand common enterprise apparently has no historical precedent, and should be counted as one of the main reasons for whatever success was achieved by the Mongols. -p. xiii
This matters when Weatherford claims Mongols worshipped the nation in place of a state religion, because his description can sound a bit fash. Now when the Russian arm of the Worldwide Fascist Resurgence is recruiting Genghis – true, not so much for ethno-nationalism but for authoritarianism and ‘strongman’ physicality – we don’t need misunderstandings. Don’t feed the fash.
There are reasons for this.
One, Weatherford was an anthropologist. Historians can be resistant to other disciplines, to interdisciplinary perspectives, sadly. To my disenchantment I’ve found this out myself with literary criticism: so much to offer to the study of history, yet I’ve seen non-acceptance, even hostility. Anthropology, like literary studies, has a huge amount to offer history, and Mongol history specifically.
Two, when Weatherford prepared himself to write about Mongols, he began to learn Mongolian (he says it took him ten years to reach proficiency). Whereas received wisdom among Mongolists has said you need to learn Chinese, Persian, and six other languages but ‘funnily enough’ (actual quote), Mongolian is the one language you don’t need to learn, because (roughly quoted) there’s nothing in it. Well, Weatherford still relies on translations for the Persian and Chinese sources etc., and to historians this is the mark of a popular historian, a populariser. Actually he isn’t what we call a populariser (of academic work), because although he wrote for a wide audience from the start, his content has original investigation and interpretation – none more than in this book. And Weatherford constantly talks up new Mongolian scholarship, expresses the hope that his tentative ideas will be quickly superseded by young Mongolian scholars. That’s his answer to ‘knows Mongolian, doesn’t know the languages of the usual sources’.
But one effect may be obvious: if you dwell always in the Persian and Chinese sources, and Armenian and Latin – the languages of conquered peoples and other enemies of the Mongols – you’re going to escape with difficulty from their negative slant. Mongol Studies in the 21st century has found its way out of that negative slant and shed a lot of prejudice. But you can see that history being written by the losers in this case has been the main problem and remains one. Meanwhile you’ve probably heard what a resurgence Chinggis Khaan enjoys in his own country and how positively they view him. So Weatherford, reading Mongolian, and now residing in Mongolia, fairly inevitably still startles the publishing world with his positivity. He’s coming from a Mongolian place. And that may need a pinch of salt. But you know what else needs salt, like silos of it? The arrogance in that ‘except Mongolian, which you don’t need to learn – nothing’s written in it’. The dismissal of Mongolian scholarship as too positive. As if scholars in the UK, US, Australia, do not do exactly the same with their main nation-building figures. It is a struggle in these places to see and present to the public the bad side of your own history. Let’s not have the double standards to lecture Mongolians about that. When the qualifications have been ‘to learn every language except Mongolian’, how are Western scholars to know what goes on in Mongolian, anyway? Things they may have been missing, Weatherford brings to attention, and this too makes his books seem odd to them.
Onto the book. It is rich in sources, like Weatherford’s others but increasingly. Often these are Mongolian histories written in the 16th, 17th, and on to the 19th centuries. The 16th-17th century histories are post-Buddhist conversion and re-mythologise in Buddhist terms. This means they are often left aside as anachronistic, but Weatherford quotes them as part of the story of how Mongols have remembered Chinggis and told his legend. He then speaks of the European and American 18th century, when Genghis (known as Zingis then or else Genghiscan the Great) was re-discovered, before the 19th century kicked in with its race science that made Europeans despise Asians in new ways. Much of the European 18th century material is laudatory of Zingis and fascinated by his achievements – more impressive than Alexander, in war and peace, was not an uncommon thing to say (you don’t expect to hear that post-19th century, do you, that Genghis was a better man than Alexander?). There is a gulf in treatment of him between the 18th century and us, and I can only explain the change by 19th century race science. And perhaps by the 20th century world wars, but that’s another argument. Quest for God’s subtitle is overblown for me, but Weatherford’s text does not make gigantic claims: mostly he points out the fashion for Zingis in the 18thC and how the Mongols got drawn into the idea of religious freedom of conscience, awakening in Europe at that time. Here was a practical, operating example of a government over many faiths succeeding with a policy of religious toleration and plurality. Gibbon has a famous sentence but he wasn’t on his own. The focus on how Genghis brought ‘religious freedom’ isn’t Weatherford’s, it’s the European and American 18th century’s.
The book is both a history of religions before, in and around the Mongol Empire, and a spiritual biography of Genghis Khan. The best conventional biography is Michal Biran, Chinggis Khan. Bad ones are legion. Weatherford’s (what else?) is an unconventional biography, an attempt to piece together his inner life, particularly around beliefs, morality, conduct, and explanations of the world – the ‘religious’ issues. As usual with a Weatherford book, I find a hundred places to discuss or disagree, but the point is, nobody else even tries to write an inner-life biography. And yet we have the materials.
One regret. I wish he wouldn’t use ‘nation’ for the Mongol ulus or whatever, in the way he does. ‘Nation’ is too 19th-century and cannot escape an ethnic flavour unless he makes plain at every turn (in my favourite quote from In the Service of the Khan: Eminent Personalities of the Early Mongol-Yüan Period):
The Mongol conquest was more than merely a Mongol affair. From the start, it was a grand enterprise in which a galaxy of personages from many races and cultures participated, but always under Mongol leadership... The enlistment by the Mongols of so many people of such diverse backgrounds in one grand common enterprise apparently has no historical precedent, and should be counted as one of the main reasons for whatever success was achieved by the Mongols. -p. xiii
This matters when Weatherford claims Mongols worshipped the nation in place of a state religion, because his description can sound a bit fash. Now when the Russian arm of the Worldwide Fascist Resurgence is recruiting Genghis – true, not so much for ethno-nationalism but for authoritarianism and ‘strongman’ physicality – we don’t need misunderstandings. Don’t feed the fash.
March 28, 2023
This is the 8th book I have read on Genghis Khan and the Mongol Empire in the past 2 years (including both non-fiction and fiction). So I guess it’s safe to say, I’m a fan of the Great Khan. Not that I approve of everything he did, by any means. He was a ruthless, cold-blooded killer and a power hungry conqueror who would sometimes lay waste an entire city and kill everything alive in it just to make a point. Pretty harsh, bro.
But I do admire much about the man and his improbable rise from an illiterate tribesman from the Mongolian wilderness to becoming the most powerful ruler on Earth. As a ruler, he employed intelligence, generosity, patience, and tolerance as well as fearlessness, aggression, and ruthlessness. He was definitely a man who believed in himself (talk about self-esteem)!
I don’t agree with Weatherford’s supposition that Genghis Khan gave us religious freedom—I would say that’s quite a stretch. There were far more important influences on the Enlightenment. Nonetheless, I did enjoy this book.
FYI: Weatherford’s “Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World” is an excellent read, and all five books in Conn Iggulden’s “Conqueror” series of historical fiction about Genghis, his family, and the Mongol Empire are absolutely magnificent, top-shelf works.
But I do admire much about the man and his improbable rise from an illiterate tribesman from the Mongolian wilderness to becoming the most powerful ruler on Earth. As a ruler, he employed intelligence, generosity, patience, and tolerance as well as fearlessness, aggression, and ruthlessness. He was definitely a man who believed in himself (talk about self-esteem)!
I don’t agree with Weatherford’s supposition that Genghis Khan gave us religious freedom—I would say that’s quite a stretch. There were far more important influences on the Enlightenment. Nonetheless, I did enjoy this book.
FYI: Weatherford’s “Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World” is an excellent read, and all five books in Conn Iggulden’s “Conqueror” series of historical fiction about Genghis, his family, and the Mongol Empire are absolutely magnificent, top-shelf works.
February 15, 2017
3.5 stars
There would be few living who could claim to know more about Genghis Khan than Jack Weatherford. The sub- title itself is intriguing "How the World's Greatest Conquerer gave us religious freedom" and therein lies the enigma.
Genghis Khan by his own volition believed he was on occasion an incarnation of God and on others, the Wrath of God. He was not alone. It was the fashion of the times for kings to portray their royalty as ordained by God. The common man would thereby take on their taxes without question and often fight to death for the King and by default for God.
The buck stops at the top and never before nor after was this more relevant. If Genghis himself was against genocide, it would not have occurred at all, let alone on such as grand scale. Not one of his inner sanctum, not his four dogs nor four horses, nor his sons, nor the Keshig would ever have massacred so many.
The book tries hard to interpret the numerous foray's Genghis Khan had into understanding the religions of the world as his acceptance of all religions. Yet as described by Weatherford in this book, the Great Khan questioned religious clerics as to whether indeed his coming was foretold.
Religion was just a tool and fighting the faiths would have been an inconvenience in his greater plan. After all, he promoted himself as being God or the Wrath of God, irrespective of whichever faith his conquests chose to be. If it was ordained by God, who were the conquered to contest it.
Jack Weatherford probably knows more about Genghis than anyone else and if you are after information about Genghis this is a great book to find some hidden gems. The premise that Genghis gave the world religious freedom, in my opinion borders on historical fiction.
There would be few living who could claim to know more about Genghis Khan than Jack Weatherford. The sub- title itself is intriguing "How the World's Greatest Conquerer gave us religious freedom" and therein lies the enigma.
Genghis Khan by his own volition believed he was on occasion an incarnation of God and on others, the Wrath of God. He was not alone. It was the fashion of the times for kings to portray their royalty as ordained by God. The common man would thereby take on their taxes without question and often fight to death for the King and by default for God.
The buck stops at the top and never before nor after was this more relevant. If Genghis himself was against genocide, it would not have occurred at all, let alone on such as grand scale. Not one of his inner sanctum, not his four dogs nor four horses, nor his sons, nor the Keshig would ever have massacred so many.
The book tries hard to interpret the numerous foray's Genghis Khan had into understanding the religions of the world as his acceptance of all religions. Yet as described by Weatherford in this book, the Great Khan questioned religious clerics as to whether indeed his coming was foretold.
Religion was just a tool and fighting the faiths would have been an inconvenience in his greater plan. After all, he promoted himself as being God or the Wrath of God, irrespective of whichever faith his conquests chose to be. If it was ordained by God, who were the conquered to contest it.
Jack Weatherford probably knows more about Genghis than anyone else and if you are after information about Genghis this is a great book to find some hidden gems. The premise that Genghis gave the world religious freedom, in my opinion borders on historical fiction.
October 13, 2022
I really enjoyed this book, maybe enjoy is the wrong word but it was fascinating stuff from the very first page of the preface.
It is very well written and I learned an awful lot without feeling like I was reading a textbook. I’d happily read more of this author’s work. He writes in a very informative and objective way, which is easy to understand and full of details. Somehow it is incredibly thorough yet it doesn’t drag on or feel too long winded.
I was also impressed at this author’s dedication to writing this book, it clearly took a lot of research, both time and effort and our reward for his hard work is a well thought out book at the end of it.
If you are looking for a history of Genghis Khan I would say look no further, it is in fact Genghis Khan and The Quest for God but it isn’t just about religion, I thought it was a very well rounded history and full of insights into a man and the world at that time.
I cannot fault this book.
It is very well written and I learned an awful lot without feeling like I was reading a textbook. I’d happily read more of this author’s work. He writes in a very informative and objective way, which is easy to understand and full of details. Somehow it is incredibly thorough yet it doesn’t drag on or feel too long winded.
I was also impressed at this author’s dedication to writing this book, it clearly took a lot of research, both time and effort and our reward for his hard work is a well thought out book at the end of it.
If you are looking for a history of Genghis Khan I would say look no further, it is in fact Genghis Khan and The Quest for God but it isn’t just about religion, I thought it was a very well rounded history and full of insights into a man and the world at that time.
I cannot fault this book.
November 19, 2016
Back in the summer after I graduated high school, I spent a large chunk of time in Mongolia traveling along a north/south axis from Ulanbaatar first to the Gobi and other southern regions and then up towards the wooded parks of the north. Along that journey I briefly and unintentionally met Jack Weatherford and his party of Mongol scholars at one of the ger-camps set up along the route. He mentioned a book he was about to publish. A year(or two) later, that book, Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World, came out. As someone whose prime historical interest was the Mongol Empire since mid-high school and who already was moving in the direction of thinking that the Mongols needed to be historically rehabilitated to be more than just badasses, I ate it up. There are points where it over-states its case, but the overall argument in accessible and holistic form was desperately needed for Eurasian history.
Mongol Queens came about 5 years later, and was also a great contribution to the English language coverage of the topic by restoring the central role of women in Mongolian society and the (outside of Mongolia, anyway) 'lost' figure of Mandukhai Khatun to the narrative of the country. I ended up citing it extensively in my own book.
Now we come to a religious history of the Mongol Empire, with a focus on the life of Chinggis Khan but with no small amount of attention to subsequent events up through Mongke Khan. Other reviewers have already pointed out the thesis is somewhat thin and this book reads more like a spiritually tinged biography of the Khan. Maybe so, but in so doing it explores the vital and (in its time) revolutionary nature of how the Mongol Empire approached domestic policy. The argument that this later influenced some enlightenment thinkers I find unconvincing, but the rest of it is a welcome addition to scholarship in the field.
One quibble I would have is that in an otherwise excellent background of the steppe before Chinggis (including the Uighurs and early Turks) and their approach to foreign cultures around them, the Khitans were given short shrift. Considering the pioneering governmental structure of the Khitan Liao empire (and the pre-Naiman era successor state of the Kara-Khitai) of dual administration for the nomadic and settled people, as well as large blocks of geographic and cultural domestic autonomy for subject peoples, as well as Yelu Chucai being a Khitan of Liao lineage and Chinggis Khan's most important administrator, I feel that a large and important aspect in the development of Mongol thought was overlooked by not delving into the previous Khitan empires.
Mongol Queens came about 5 years later, and was also a great contribution to the English language coverage of the topic by restoring the central role of women in Mongolian society and the (outside of Mongolia, anyway) 'lost' figure of Mandukhai Khatun to the narrative of the country. I ended up citing it extensively in my own book.
Now we come to a religious history of the Mongol Empire, with a focus on the life of Chinggis Khan but with no small amount of attention to subsequent events up through Mongke Khan. Other reviewers have already pointed out the thesis is somewhat thin and this book reads more like a spiritually tinged biography of the Khan. Maybe so, but in so doing it explores the vital and (in its time) revolutionary nature of how the Mongol Empire approached domestic policy. The argument that this later influenced some enlightenment thinkers I find unconvincing, but the rest of it is a welcome addition to scholarship in the field.
One quibble I would have is that in an otherwise excellent background of the steppe before Chinggis (including the Uighurs and early Turks) and their approach to foreign cultures around them, the Khitans were given short shrift. Considering the pioneering governmental structure of the Khitan Liao empire (and the pre-Naiman era successor state of the Kara-Khitai) of dual administration for the nomadic and settled people, as well as large blocks of geographic and cultural domestic autonomy for subject peoples, as well as Yelu Chucai being a Khitan of Liao lineage and Chinggis Khan's most important administrator, I feel that a large and important aspect in the development of Mongol thought was overlooked by not delving into the previous Khitan empires.
February 6, 2017
The book is quite well researched by all means. There are lots of quotations. But the problem arises with the author himself. Oh he writes vividly in a very imaginative way. And that is the problem I have with this book. It is riddled with speculations and assumptions. It is as if Jack Weatherford was there when Chinggis Khaan was alive. As if he was one of the first hand witnesses. The book is full of subjectivity. Not that I am complaining. At least he portrays Chinggis Khaan in a very positive way. So I am sure many will read this book and will like it. In a way, this book kind of might serve as a propaganda on our side. About the contents of this book, I wonder if Jack Weatherford really needed to include Preface and the last chapter to this book. It is as if he needed one more excuse to write book on Chinggis Khaan. The argument, he puts forth in terms of how Chinggis Khaan influenced the idea of religious tolerance, is non conclusive. I think it wasn't that strong case. So for good read on Genghis Khan, i recommend this book. For serious history geeks, you might prefer more objective take on the subject.
August 12, 2017
This was pretty skippable. From what I can tell, Mongols recognized the importance of freedom of religion for comity when ruling one of the most expansive and cosmopolitan empires of all time, and weren't zealous enough about their own religious practices and beliefs (which seem to have been mostly superficial) to insist on conversion. Toward the end the author tries to connect the thread from Khan to Voltaire to Locke to Jefferson to the rest of the world, but it's kind of ad hoc. Instead, this book spends the majority of its time providing a thorough biography of Genghis Khan and undermining the Western propaganda about Mongols being backward butchers and barbarians.
August 14, 2018
Its an enjoyable book, however, its basically a slightly expanded version of his first book on Genghis Khan. And while there is additional information on religion and spirituality and Genghis Khan, there's nothing much extra to really firm up the author's thesis on Genghis Khan being the originator of religious freedom, from his original book. Still enjoyed the read though.
March 30, 2022
Quotes too long to fit in the lil update box:
November 29, 2018
FYI, I am NOT a professional book reader :) This book is possibly the best historical non-fiction book I've ever read. Weatherford has great skill in keeping the reader engaged, the story flowing, and for deftly taking enlightening side trips. His style includes introducing complex groups of people and topics quickly, then revisiting them just often enough to remind the reader of key points while also giving more depth to the story. It was a bit like listening to a truly great lecturer...you know, like that rare professor who can really bring thier subject to life and make learning seem easy? I had not read his best seller, "Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World". I look forward to reading that now. I expect that there is much overlap between these books regarding the mere factual events of Genghis Khan' s rise to power. The emphasis of this book, however, is well developed by Weatherford at the outset and he revisits it throughout the text without wearing it out (mostly). The epilogue even has a scintillating story of the strange connection between Genghis Khan and an America vice President, Henry Wallace. He shared the Whitehouse with FDR, and without spoiling things let me say that the whole tale sounds like perfect fodder for an Indiana Jones movie.
I wish the book had more maps...i love them, and they help visualize such a geographically extensive setting. I also would have liked a family tree, but I see there is one in the earlier book. Regardless of a few quibbles, this is an excellent read and I highly recommend it. Learning this stuff should be required on all college campuses.
I wish the book had more maps...i love them, and they help visualize such a geographically extensive setting. I also would have liked a family tree, but I see there is one in the earlier book. Regardless of a few quibbles, this is an excellent read and I highly recommend it. Learning this stuff should be required on all college campuses.
November 19, 2016
I listened to this audiobook directly after Weatherford's first book on Genghis Khan and the making of the modern world. This book I'd say is like an abridged version of the first. He retails the whole story just without as many details (which I actually found helpful, I was able to get the big picture) and adds a little more about religious themes than in the first book.
Genghis Khan pretty much made the state and his law the Absolute; it was to be the like a universal religion, as long as they were subservient and did violate or cross it, they could worship whatever other god they wanted and in whatever way.
It kind of makes me think of the Romans who made the worship of the Caesar to be the unifying factor of the Empire. If the many different conquered nations simply offered incense to the emperor's image and obeyed Roman law, they could jolly well worship whatever god they wanted according to their customs.
Of course, this didn't work with monotheistic Jews and Christians. Maybe, that is the genius of Genghis, he didn't set up images of himself or create any religious rites, he just made the almighty state supreme.
I get the sense that for Liberal progressives, the state is god. Of course, they won't call it a religion, yet it functions as one, and like religious fanatics, they want it to be supreme and all the others to be subservient to it. For the more tolerant secular Humanist, If people simply bow their knee before they state, then they can go on worshiping whatever imaginary being they've made up in their head.
Genghis Khan pretty much made the state and his law the Absolute; it was to be the like a universal religion, as long as they were subservient and did violate or cross it, they could worship whatever other god they wanted and in whatever way.
It kind of makes me think of the Romans who made the worship of the Caesar to be the unifying factor of the Empire. If the many different conquered nations simply offered incense to the emperor's image and obeyed Roman law, they could jolly well worship whatever god they wanted according to their customs.
Of course, this didn't work with monotheistic Jews and Christians. Maybe, that is the genius of Genghis, he didn't set up images of himself or create any religious rites, he just made the almighty state supreme.
I get the sense that for Liberal progressives, the state is god. Of course, they won't call it a religion, yet it functions as one, and like religious fanatics, they want it to be supreme and all the others to be subservient to it. For the more tolerant secular Humanist, If people simply bow their knee before they state, then they can go on worshiping whatever imaginary being they've made up in their head.
December 15, 2016
When I think of religious freedom, my mind certainly doesn't jump straight to Genghis Khan.
So when I saw this book, my curiosity took over and I knew that I had to read and find out more.
Weatherford takes us on a journey through Genghis Khan's life, and through that we are able to see how he dealt with the various religious sects and different religions he encountered during his conquers.
Something I really appreciate about this book is that we learn about Genghis as a person as well as a leader, so it really gives us a good, wide perspective on why respecting all religions was so important to him.
The book could be dry and over-detailed at times, but overall it was an enjoyable and enlightening read.
So when I saw this book, my curiosity took over and I knew that I had to read and find out more.
Weatherford takes us on a journey through Genghis Khan's life, and through that we are able to see how he dealt with the various religious sects and different religions he encountered during his conquers.
Something I really appreciate about this book is that we learn about Genghis as a person as well as a leader, so it really gives us a good, wide perspective on why respecting all religions was so important to him.
The book could be dry and over-detailed at times, but overall it was an enjoyable and enlightening read.
Read
June 1, 2025While it does seem like Genghis Khan was one of the more progressive figures of his time -- possibly true -- it’s hard not to feel that this book romanticizes him a bit too much. Yes, his policies on religious tolerance were remarkable for the era, but let’s not forget he was also a ruthless conqueror. It’s unlikely he was as kind, beautiful, and tolerant as the narrative sometimes suggests.
July 7, 2020
Good overall history of religion under the Khans and their legacy, but does seem forgiving at times of the Khan's motives. However, this doesn't take away from its overall story, but maybe take parts with a grain of salt.
October 24, 2025
Incredible account of the misunderstood founder of cultural and religious freedom.
February 6, 2017
Over the Christmas / New Year holiday we visited relatives in New York City. When there, I do try to visit the Strand Bookstore, which has the tagline “18 Miles of Books.” It is a very impressive collection of books for sale, with great prices.
Right before leaving the store, I spotted the book, Genghis Khan and the Quest for God. Why did I buy it? For one, I had read two other books by this author related to Genghis Khan
• Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World (around 2004)
• The Secret History of the Mongol Queens: how the Daughters of Genghis Khan Rescued His Empire (around 2010)
I don’t know why I had been unaware of the extent of Genghis Khan’s empire within a generation of his own life (was I sleeping in world history, was it that is was not taught, or was it before the rediscovery of “The Secret History of the Mongols” in the early 20th century (before my world history class) which was not appreciated and later the opening of Mongolia to others after the collapse of the communist regime (after my world history class) where more interest in the subject was allowed. In any case, I enjoyed both of those books.
Another reason for getting this book, frankly, was an endorsement by Robert D. Kaplan, who is a great writer of geopolitics. To quote from the back cover of the book, Robert Kaplan stated “The conquests of the Mongols were arguably the most important event of the last millennium in Eurasia. Yet Genghis Khan has remained an opaque and enigmatic figure, a symbol of cruelty and little else. Jack Weatherford has peeled back the curtain and revealed a complex man and thinker in this pathbreaking work of rousing history and scholarship.”
At one level this book looks at another side of Genghis Khan, the side use to govern lands rather than simply rout and loot lands. Genghis tried to recruit talented people to his circle, be they warriors or artisans. Early in his expansion to unite Mongolia and then some of the surrounding lands he would make a marriage between key figures of the new land and of Mongolia, often through his family or those loyal to him.
The author makes the case that Genghis Khan believed he had a destiny to concur the world. The author also argues that Genghis Khan had little sympathy for conquered rulers that he felt had not maintained an obligation to those they ruled. The author explores many aspects of how Genghis Khan thought as well as how he acted.
As his empire expanded, he was faced with how to govern over peoples of different religions, who might war with each other over the religion. One of his earliest laws addressed religious freedom. In an early biography of Genghis Khan, the History of Genghizcan the Great, the First Emperor of the Ancient Moguls and Tartars (Francois Petis de la Croix, 1710), Petis de la Croix wrote “Far from ordaining many punishment or persecution against those who were not his sect,” [Genghis Khan clearly forbid anyone] “to disturb or molest any person on account of religion and desired that everyone should be left at liberty to profess that which pleased him best.” (Page 348 of book being reviewed).
The author (Weatherford) then draws the line between this law of Genghis Khan and Thomas Jefferson’s law (Commonwealth of Virginia) “That no man shall … suffer on account of his religious opinions or belief; but that all men shall be free to profess … their opinions in matters of religion.” At the time of the colonial America the leading thinkers were looking for models that allowed religious freedom, and many of them were aware of the French writers (and Jefferson had many books in his collection (later to become part of the Library of Congress) that understand the model from Genghis Khan. And of course this concept found its way into the first amendment of the US Constitution:
Amendment I. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Later in his life Genghis Khan invited many leader religious leaders to talk with him. They tried to convert him to their religion, he refused based on his own religious beliefs that reflected the Mongolian thoughts at the time, worshiping the blue sky (father sky, mother earth).
In another theme of the book, Genghis Khan often put women (some of whom were Christian) in places to administer lands, while the men would go off to conquer new lands and peoples. There are many places in The Secret History where text has been cut, often about women. Perhaps future historians will shed some light on that.
On a final note, the author’s wife suggested the theme of the book and encouraged him to write it. She did not live to see the project to the end.
Right before leaving the store, I spotted the book, Genghis Khan and the Quest for God. Why did I buy it? For one, I had read two other books by this author related to Genghis Khan
• Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World (around 2004)
• The Secret History of the Mongol Queens: how the Daughters of Genghis Khan Rescued His Empire (around 2010)
I don’t know why I had been unaware of the extent of Genghis Khan’s empire within a generation of his own life (was I sleeping in world history, was it that is was not taught, or was it before the rediscovery of “The Secret History of the Mongols” in the early 20th century (before my world history class) which was not appreciated and later the opening of Mongolia to others after the collapse of the communist regime (after my world history class) where more interest in the subject was allowed. In any case, I enjoyed both of those books.
Another reason for getting this book, frankly, was an endorsement by Robert D. Kaplan, who is a great writer of geopolitics. To quote from the back cover of the book, Robert Kaplan stated “The conquests of the Mongols were arguably the most important event of the last millennium in Eurasia. Yet Genghis Khan has remained an opaque and enigmatic figure, a symbol of cruelty and little else. Jack Weatherford has peeled back the curtain and revealed a complex man and thinker in this pathbreaking work of rousing history and scholarship.”
At one level this book looks at another side of Genghis Khan, the side use to govern lands rather than simply rout and loot lands. Genghis tried to recruit talented people to his circle, be they warriors or artisans. Early in his expansion to unite Mongolia and then some of the surrounding lands he would make a marriage between key figures of the new land and of Mongolia, often through his family or those loyal to him.
The author makes the case that Genghis Khan believed he had a destiny to concur the world. The author also argues that Genghis Khan had little sympathy for conquered rulers that he felt had not maintained an obligation to those they ruled. The author explores many aspects of how Genghis Khan thought as well as how he acted.
As his empire expanded, he was faced with how to govern over peoples of different religions, who might war with each other over the religion. One of his earliest laws addressed religious freedom. In an early biography of Genghis Khan, the History of Genghizcan the Great, the First Emperor of the Ancient Moguls and Tartars (Francois Petis de la Croix, 1710), Petis de la Croix wrote “Far from ordaining many punishment or persecution against those who were not his sect,” [Genghis Khan clearly forbid anyone] “to disturb or molest any person on account of religion and desired that everyone should be left at liberty to profess that which pleased him best.” (Page 348 of book being reviewed).
The author (Weatherford) then draws the line between this law of Genghis Khan and Thomas Jefferson’s law (Commonwealth of Virginia) “That no man shall … suffer on account of his religious opinions or belief; but that all men shall be free to profess … their opinions in matters of religion.” At the time of the colonial America the leading thinkers were looking for models that allowed religious freedom, and many of them were aware of the French writers (and Jefferson had many books in his collection (later to become part of the Library of Congress) that understand the model from Genghis Khan. And of course this concept found its way into the first amendment of the US Constitution:
Amendment I. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Later in his life Genghis Khan invited many leader religious leaders to talk with him. They tried to convert him to their religion, he refused based on his own religious beliefs that reflected the Mongolian thoughts at the time, worshiping the blue sky (father sky, mother earth).
In another theme of the book, Genghis Khan often put women (some of whom were Christian) in places to administer lands, while the men would go off to conquer new lands and peoples. There are many places in The Secret History where text has been cut, often about women. Perhaps future historians will shed some light on that.
On a final note, the author’s wife suggested the theme of the book and encouraged him to write it. She did not live to see the project to the end.
March 25, 2022
按：內文已經過修訂。原註已略去，請參閱本書內文。全文參見 https://www.academia.edu/36282444/0039
如果要票選在世界史上影響最大以及最具爭議性的帝王，我想成吉思汗應該有機會排入前三名。過去成吉思汗與他一手建立的蒙古帝國在歷史上的評價一直相當兩極，即便在其故鄉蒙古亦然。在伊斯蘭世界中，成吉思汗被認為是上帝之鞭，而且殘殺了許多穆斯林，而後來其孫旭烈兀更終結了阿拔斯王朝的哈里發統治，自此伊斯蘭世界失去了共主；但是蒙古帝國的征服與伊斯蘭化也有助於伊斯蘭教的廣為傳播。在俄羅斯世界中，蒙古統治所造成的「韃靼桎梏」（Tatar Yoke）被視為是俄羅斯發展落後於西歐的主因，但是在蒙古庇護莫斯科大公國作為收稅與統治的代表下，也創造了後者日後崛起的條件。在中國，元朝的統治過去被認為是中國歷史上的逆流，漢文化與儒家思想受到打壓，科舉制度一度停擺；但是蒙古人打破超過百年的中國南北分裂態勢，使漢地重新得到一統，也奠立了後來大中國的領土規模。在蒙古國，原先在社會主義時期（一九二四～一九九二年），成吉思汗被認為是壓迫蒙古人民的封建領主，不能公開崇拜。直到一九九二年民主化之後這種情況才逐漸好轉。
近年來在引介成吉思汗與蒙古帝國的歷史給大眾的通俗非虛構作品中，傑克‧魏澤福的著作應該是最受歡迎的作品之一。其首部與蒙古相關的作品《成吉思汗：近代世界的創造者》英文版於二○○四年出版。 在這部作品中，作者主張蒙古帝國所揭櫫的原則，諸如通行紙鈔、國家位階高於教會、宗教自由、外交豁免、國際法等，對於後來歐洲社會啟發甚大。而印刷術、火藥與指南針等三大科技在蒙古帝國時期東傳至西方，也促成了文學、戰爭與航海等方面的進步。可以說，成吉思汗所創建的蒙���帝國是近代世界的先聲。該書出版後一時洛陽紙貴，榮登紐約時報暢銷書排行榜長達數週。作者也因此獲頒蒙古國的北極星勳章，以表彰其推廣蒙古文化與歷史的貢獻。其第二本書《成吉思汗的女兒們》則探討女性在蒙古帝國建立的過程中被忽略的貢獻，例如成吉思汗的女兒們被作為政治聯姻的工具，穩定了蒙古帝國與周邊同盟國間的關係；成吉思汗過世後，其兒媳脫列哥那與孫媳斡兀立‧海迷失攝政所造成的混亂，還有其兒媳唆魯禾帖尼讓拖雷系的後裔能夠掌握大權的經過；最後是賢者滿都海可敦輔佐年幼的丈夫把禿猛可重振黃金氏族在蒙古的統治。 該書也堪稱是英語學界關於該主題的第一部綜合性專著，其重要性不可磨滅。而前揭二書的正體中文版也由黃中憲翻譯，並由時報出版社發行。二○一六年，魏澤福推出了他的第三部相關作品《征服者與眾神：成吉思汗如何為蒙古帝國開創盛世》英文版。如今正體中文版也由原班人馬擔綱出版，我個人也很期待本書中文版的面世。
在本書《征服者與眾神》的序言中，作者首先從吉朋在《羅馬帝國衰亡史》一書主張成吉思汗與歐洲哲學的寬容觀和新興國家美國的宗教自由之間的關聯開始談起，並且梳理了由法國學者佛朗索瓦‧佩帝‧德拉克魯瓦（François Pétis de la Croix）於一七一○年初版的《古代蒙古人和韃靼人的第一個皇帝成吉思汗大帝的歷史》（The History of Genghizcan the Great, First Emperor of the Ancient Moguls and Tartars）一書在北美十三州殖民地的流通與閱讀史。他發現美國獨立革命先賢之一的湯瑪斯‧傑佛遜（Thomas Jefferson）曾經受該書中提到成吉思汗將宗教自由形諸法律的影響，以及維吉尼亞成文法與美國憲法第一修正條款中對與成吉思汗的第一道法律在強調宗教自由的精神上的相似性。導論〈神的憤怒〉則說明成吉思汗自認為是上天派來懲罰穆斯林的人，因為穆斯林犯了過錯。自成吉思汗以降的蒙古大汗都深信上天透過祂所授予權力的那些人表達祂的意旨。而蒙古人的勝利和興盛正是他們得到天佑的證明。而成吉思汗晚年在阿富汗聆聽各宗教人士的說法，這種對神的追尋則必須要從他早年歲月的成長過程開始談起。
其後的正文分為四大部分，第一部分「成為鐵木真」強調了蒙古境內的「神山」不兒罕合勒敦山在成為成吉思汗以前的鐵木真生命中的重要地位。蒙古人信仰長生天，而不兒罕合勒敦山則是讓成吉思汗最接近天的地方。在自己氏族和部落不願保護鐵木真時，不兒罕合勒敦山保護了他，而從他母親訶額倫和老獵人札兒赤兀歹那兒，他學到尊敬這座山，並視它為世界中心與生命源頭。而來自不兒罕合勒敦山的札兒赤兀歹更是鐵木真名義上和行為上的精神導師，幫他指出人生的正道。也因此，成吉思汗要求之後世世代代的蒙古人都要崇拜不兒罕合勒敦山。
第二部分「成為成吉思汗」則討論鐵木真在統一蒙古諸部後登基為成吉思汗，建立大蒙古國後。反對派以其父好友蒙力克之子闊闊出‧帖卜騰格理為核心集結起來，成為成吉思汗的最大對手。闊闊出是一名薩滿，他自稱能跟神靈感應，勢力漸強，並教唆成吉思汗對付有可能篡位的弟弟合撒兒與帖木格。但後來成吉思汗聽從妻子孛兒帖之建議，除掉闊闊出。但是此舉也開了一個血腥的先例，即蒙古可汗頭一次殺掉自稱權力高於國家或可汗的宗教領袖。
第三部分「成為世界征服者」討論的是成吉思汗在向外擴張的過程中遭遇到許多定居大國的賢者與宗教人士，例如兼通儒佛的耶律楚材、道教長春真人丘處機與佛教的海雲禪師等等。他利用這些賢者與宗教人士來協助他所征服的定居社會，因為他們大多有管理收稅和編纂法典的經驗。而成吉思汗應受佛教徒壓迫的西遼穆斯林之邀前往解救他們，則被作者視為是他的首次宗教戰爭。在征服西遼後，他下令每個人都應遵守自己的宗教，遵行自己的宗教信條--這也被視為是蒙古帝國首次將宗教自由的規定納入法律中。而成吉思汗後來拿下花剌子模後，創立了一個全新的穆斯林行政人員集團，並派他們到中國協助管理他們剛征服的領土。他利用穆斯林的文書本事，但又利用其中不同教派、族群，讓他們相互牽制，以限制每個宗教的潛在影響力。但一二二一年，蒙古人兵敗八米俺（即巴米揚），成吉思汗在這場敗戰中失去了他的愛孫莫圖根，成為他人生的一個轉捩點。成吉思汗尋求其他宗教，企圖找到能夠撫平人心的知識，並找到他所未參透的奧祕。因此成吉思汗在阿富汗時，召見了長春真人丘處機，但是這次會面卻不盡人意。他認知到宗教人士在治理他的龐大帝國上功用有限。他們會一些有用的技能，但長於論道，拙於行動，因此用處不大。
第四部分「成為神」則提到成吉思汗與薩滿、教士、學者、佛僧、道人、毛拉多次晤談之後，認為其中某些人真心求善，但無人展現了對道德、生命意義或神之本質的充分認識。他們和他一樣都只是努力想瞭解世界的人。而獨尊一教，貶抑他教，對其帝國是有害的。但是成吉思汗歸天後，蒙古帝國內部開始分裂，蒙古統治者也逐漸放棄宗教自由的政策方針。蒙哥汗為了征服南宋，必須爭取南宋周邊之佛教國家（如大理、吐蕃等）的支持，因此設計了一連串的佛道宗教辯論，而且偏袒佛教一方，以便崇佛抑道。後來旭烈兀西征，摧毀了阿剌木忒和報達（今巴格達），殺害哈里發和伊瑪目，則顯示成吉思汗的宗教寬容敕令已經不再得到尊重。直到成吉思汗過世後數百年，他的宗教自由想法才重獲十七世紀的法國學者關注。但他的遺風在十八世紀北美洲影響最大，北美殖民地的反英分子爭取獨立時，試圖尋求歐洲經驗以外的模式來借鏡。最後蒙古模式的宗教自由透過成吉思汗的傳記在北美流傳，而影響了湯瑪斯‧傑佛遜，並且成為美國憲法的基本精神。這也呼應了原英文版的副標題「世上最偉大的征服者如何給了我們宗教自由」（How the World's Greatest Conqueror Gave Us Religious Freedom）。
本書的內容與作者先前出版的兩部著作有不少重疊的部分，特別是在於蒙古帝國崛起與衰微過程的描述。如果說第一本書《成吉思汗：近代世界的創造者》是綜論成吉思汗與其子孫所建立之蒙古帝國的興衰史與其歷史遺產；第二本書《成吉思汗的女兒》說的是成吉思汗所建立的蒙古帝國，在其子孫不成材的情況下，有賴於其女兒與兒媳等人才得以維繫，那麼本書說的就是成吉思汗所建立的蒙古帝國之所以衰微的原因，在於未能嚴守成吉思汗所立下的宗教自由大札撒。然而這種以宗教為綱領貫穿蒙古帝國興衰史的寫作風格，是本書最大的特色。而且對於成吉思汗所揭櫫的以法律保障宗教自由的做法影響後世美國革命先賢的發現，更是讓人大開眼界。
誠如作者所言，成吉思汗允許其子民各自信仰其宗教。但是這不代表成吉思汗尊重所有的宗教儀軌與做法，而且也曾發布禁令干涉這些信眾的做法。例如本書作者曾提過成吉思汗反對以割喉、放血至死的方式宰殺動物。但是他沒有提到的是，成吉思汗曾經發布關於回回（包括穆斯林與猶太人）宰殺牲畜習慣的禁令。蒙古人傳統宰殺牲畜的做法是在牲畜胸部切開一道口子，伸手入胸腔掐斷心臟主動脈使牲畜斃命，而且讓血留在體內。以符合蒙古人不濺血於地的習慣。但穆斯林與猶太人實行「清真」（halal）或「潔食」（kosher）之法，宰殺牲畜時必須切斷牲畜的頸部動脈，將血放乾，而且在宰殺與食用過程中都必須祝禱。因此蒙古人宰殺的牲畜對回回人而言是不潔的，因而不願食用。根據《元典章》的記載，成吉思汗就曾經因為回回此舉否定了蒙古帝國的權威，故禁止回回抹殺羊的作法，並且強迫他們食用依蒙古傳統宰殺的羊。這道禁令在窩闊台汗與忽必烈汗也都曾被重申。
另外，雖然成吉思汗允許其子民各自信仰其宗教，但並非蒙古帝國境內所有的宗教都能得到大汗的承認，並享有豁免賦役的特權。美國賓州大學東亞系教授艾騖德（Christopher P. Atwood）就表示在蒙古帝國境內允許自由信奉各種宗教的政策應該要與獲得國家認可並且得以豁免賦稅的政策分開討論。根據《元史》記載，往昔僅有五個宗教的神職人員獲得免稅特權：儒家、佛教、基督教、道教與伊斯蘭教。然而考慮到一二三二年才是蒙古最早注意到儒家的時間。因此追溯到成吉思汗時期獲得免稅特權的宗教應該有四個：佛教、基督教、道教與伊斯蘭教。這裡我們可以發現，猶太教是一個特例。猶太教的信仰從未被禁，但是猶太教士則極少獲得免稅待遇或是得到國家的贊助。就我們所知，猶太教士一開始並未得到如同基督徒與穆斯林一般的免稅待遇，一二五一年蒙哥汗即位時再度確認了這項規定。直到一二九一年伊利汗國才給予猶太教徒免稅待遇，而要到一三三○年元朝才確認猶太教為得以免稅的宗教。成吉思汗所尋求的是能夠給予其統治宗教「卡里斯瑪」魅力（Charisma）的特定聖人，而非關注宗教的懺悔或教條。免稅優遇僅僅給予個體而非整個宗教。艾騖德認為宗教寬容並非蒙古宗教政策支持與保護四大宗教背後的主要思想。儒家與猶太教一開始被排除於豁免賦稅的宗教行列之外就是例證。兩者都同樣難以與蒙古的政治哲學相符合。由於儒士並未將其習慣解釋為一種對上天或神的祈禱，因而未被成吉思汗視為神職人員。而猶太教則由於未指向一個現存的國家，因此缺乏上天的確認，即所有真正的宗教都被賦予之至高無上的權力。
綜上所述，成吉思汗所給予其屬民的宗教自由與現代世界所謂的宗教自由的內容與實行上是否如此一致，其實還有值得探討的空間。不過本書從宗教信仰的視角來看待成吉思汗的崛起與蒙古帝國的興衰，以及對成吉思汗主張的宗教自由影響後世美國建國的主張也確實獨樹一幟。成吉思汗與蒙古帝國的歷史總能以各種不同形式，給予後世影響與啟發，我想這也是蒙古史之所以迷人的緣故吧。
如果要票選在世界史上影響最大以及最具爭議性的帝王，我想成吉思汗應該有機會排入前三名。過去成吉思汗與他一手建立的蒙古帝國在歷史上的評價一直相當兩極，即便在其故鄉蒙古亦然。在伊斯蘭世界中，成吉思汗被認為是上帝之鞭，而且殘殺了許多穆斯林，而後來其孫旭烈兀更終結了阿拔斯王朝的哈里發統治，自此伊斯蘭世界失去了共主；但是蒙古帝國的征服與伊斯蘭化也有助於伊斯蘭教的廣為傳播。在俄羅斯世界中，蒙古統治所造成的「韃靼桎梏」（Tatar Yoke）被視為是俄羅斯發展落後於西歐的主因，但是在蒙古庇護莫斯科大公國作為收稅與統治的代表下，也創造了後者日後崛起的條件。在中國，元朝的統治過去被認為是中國歷史上的逆流，漢文化與儒家思想受到打壓，科舉制度一度停擺；但是蒙古人打破超過百年的中國南北分裂態勢，使漢地重新得到一統，也奠立了後來大中國的領土規模。在蒙古國，原先在社會主義時期（一九二四～一九九二年），成吉思汗被認為是壓迫蒙古人民的封建領主，不能公開崇拜。直到一九九二年民主化之後這種情況才逐漸好轉。
近年來在引介成吉思汗與蒙古帝國的歷史給大眾的通俗非虛構作品中，傑克‧魏澤福的著作應該是最受歡迎的作品之一。其首部與蒙古相關的作品《成吉思汗：近代世界的創造者》英文版於二○○四年出版。 在這部作品中，作者主張蒙古帝國所揭櫫的原則，諸如通行紙鈔、國家位階高於教會、宗教自由、外交豁免、國際法等，對於後來歐洲社會啟發甚大。而印刷術、火藥與指南針等三大科技在蒙古帝國時期東傳至西方，也促成了文學、戰爭與航海等方面的進步。可以說，成吉思汗所創建的蒙���帝國是近代世界的先聲。該書出版後一時洛陽紙貴，榮登紐約時報暢銷書排行榜長達數週。作者也因此獲頒蒙古國的北極星勳章，以表彰其推廣蒙古文化與歷史的貢獻。其第二本書《成吉思汗的女兒們》則探討女性在蒙古帝國建立的過程中被忽略的貢獻，例如成吉思汗的女兒們被作為政治聯姻的工具，穩定了蒙古帝國與周邊同盟國間的關係；成吉思汗過世後，其兒媳脫列哥那與孫媳斡兀立‧海迷失攝政所造成的混亂，還有其兒媳唆魯禾帖尼讓拖雷系的後裔能夠掌握大權的經過；最後是賢者滿都海可敦輔佐年幼的丈夫把禿猛可重振黃金氏族在蒙古的統治。 該書也堪稱是英語學界關於該主題的第一部綜合性專著，其重要性不可磨滅。而前揭二書的正體中文版也由黃中憲翻譯，並由時報出版社發行。二○一六年，魏澤福推出了他的第三部相關作品《征服者與眾神：成吉思汗如何為蒙古帝國開創盛世》英文版。如今正體中文版也由原班人馬擔綱出版，我個人也很期待本書中文版的面世。
在本書《征服者與眾神》的序言中，作者首先從吉朋在《羅馬帝國衰亡史》一書主張成吉思汗與歐洲哲學的寬容觀和新興國家美國的宗教自由之間的關聯開始談起，並且梳理了由法國學者佛朗索瓦‧佩帝‧德拉克魯瓦（François Pétis de la Croix）於一七一○年初版的《古代蒙古人和韃靼人的第一個皇帝成吉思汗大帝的歷史》（The History of Genghizcan the Great, First Emperor of the Ancient Moguls and Tartars）一書在北美十三州殖民地的流通與閱讀史。他發現美國獨立革命先賢之一的湯瑪斯‧傑佛遜（Thomas Jefferson）曾經受該書中提到成吉思汗將宗教自由形諸法律的影響，以及維吉尼亞成文法與美國憲法第一修正條款中對與成吉思汗的第一道法律在強調宗教自由的精神上的相似性。導論〈神的憤怒〉則說明成吉思汗自認為是上天派來懲罰穆斯林的人，因為穆斯林犯了過錯。自成吉思汗以降的蒙古大汗都深信上天透過祂所授予權力的那些人表達祂的意旨。而蒙古人的勝利和興盛正是他們得到天佑的證明。而成吉思汗晚年在阿富汗聆聽各宗教人士的說法，這種對神的追尋則必須要從他早年歲月的成長過程開始談起。
其後的正文分為四大部分，第一部分「成為鐵木真」強調了蒙古境內的「神山」不兒罕合勒敦山在成為成吉思汗以前的鐵木真生命中的重要地位。蒙古人信仰長生天，而不兒罕合勒敦山則是讓成吉思汗最接近天的地方。在自己氏族和部落不願保護鐵木真時，不兒罕合勒敦山保護了他，而從他母親訶額倫和老獵人札兒赤兀歹那兒，他學到尊敬這座山，並視它為世界中心與生命源頭。而來自不兒罕合勒敦山的札兒赤兀歹更是鐵木真名義上和行為上的精神導師，幫他指出人生的正道。也因此，成吉思汗要求之後世世代代的蒙古人都要崇拜不兒罕合勒敦山。
第二部分「成為成吉思汗」則討論鐵木真在統一蒙古諸部後登基為成吉思汗，建立大蒙古國後。反對派以其父好友蒙力克之子闊闊出‧帖卜騰格理為核心集結起來，成為成吉思汗的最大對手。闊闊出是一名薩滿，他自稱能跟神靈感應，勢力漸強，並教唆成吉思汗對付有可能篡位的弟弟合撒兒與帖木格。但後來成吉思汗聽從妻子孛兒帖之建議，除掉闊闊出。但是此舉也開了一個血腥的先例，即蒙古可汗頭一次殺掉自稱權力高於國家或可汗的宗教領袖。
第三部分「成為世界征服者」討論的是成吉思汗在向外擴張的過程中遭遇到許多定居大國的賢者與宗教人士，例如兼通儒佛的耶律楚材、道教長春真人丘處機與佛教的海雲禪師等等。他利用這些賢者與宗教人士來協助他所征服的定居社會，因為他們大多有管理收稅和編纂法典的經驗。而成吉思汗應受佛教徒壓迫的西遼穆斯林之邀前往解救他們，則被作者視為是他的首次宗教戰爭。在征服西遼後，他下令每個人都應遵守自己的宗教，遵行自己的宗教信條--這也被視為是蒙古帝國首次將宗教自由的規定納入法律中。而成吉思汗後來拿下花剌子模後，創立了一個全新的穆斯林行政人員集團，並派他們到中國協助管理他們剛征服的領土。他利用穆斯林的文書本事，但又利用其中不同教派、族群，讓他們相互牽制，以限制每個宗教的潛在影響力。但一二二一年，蒙古人兵敗八米俺（即巴米揚），成吉思汗在這場敗戰中失去了他的愛孫莫圖根，成為他人生的一個轉捩點。成吉思汗尋求其他宗教，企圖找到能夠撫平人心的知識，並找到他所未參透的奧祕。因此成吉思汗在阿富汗時，召見了長春真人丘處機，但是這次會面卻不盡人意。他認知到宗教人士在治理他的龐大帝國上功用有限。他們會一些有用的技能，但長於論道，拙於行動，因此用處不大。
第四部分「成為神」則提到成吉思汗與薩滿、教士、學者、佛僧、道人、毛拉多次晤談之後，認為其中某些人真心求善，但無人展現了對道德、生命意義或神之本質的充分認識。他們和他一樣都只是努力想瞭解世界的人。而獨尊一教，貶抑他教，對其帝國是有害的。但是成吉思汗歸天後，蒙古帝國內部開始分裂，蒙古統治者也逐漸放棄宗教自由的政策方針。蒙哥汗為了征服南宋，必須爭取南宋周邊之佛教國家（如大理、吐蕃等）的支持，因此設計了一連串的佛道宗教辯論，而且偏袒佛教一方，以便崇佛抑道。後來旭烈兀西征，摧毀了阿剌木忒和報達（今巴格達），殺害哈里發和伊瑪目，則顯示成吉思汗的宗教寬容敕令已經不再得到尊重。直到成吉思汗過世後數百年，他的宗教自由想法才重獲十七世紀的法國學者關注。但他的遺風在十八世紀北美洲影響最大，北美殖民地的反英分子爭取獨立時，試圖尋求歐洲經驗以外的模式來借鏡。最後蒙古模式的宗教自由透過成吉思汗的傳記在北美流傳，而影響了湯瑪斯‧傑佛遜，並且成為美國憲法的基本精神。這也呼應了原英文版的副標題「世上最偉大的征服者如何給了我們宗教自由」（How the World's Greatest Conqueror Gave Us Religious Freedom）。
本書的內容與作者先前出版的兩部著作有不少重疊的部分，特別是在於蒙古帝國崛起與衰微過程的描述。如果說第一本書《成吉思汗：近代世界的創造者》是綜論成吉思汗與其子孫所建立之蒙古帝國的興衰史與其歷史遺產；第二本書《成吉思汗的女兒》說的是成吉思汗所建立的蒙古帝國，在其子孫不成材的情況下，有賴於其女兒與兒媳等人才得以維繫，那麼本書說的就是成吉思汗所建立的蒙古帝國之所以衰微的原因，在於未能嚴守成吉思汗所立下的宗教自由大札撒。然而這種以宗教為綱領貫穿蒙古帝國興衰史的寫作風格，是本書最大的特色。而且對於成吉思汗所揭櫫的以法律保障宗教自由的做法影響後世美國革命先賢的發現，更是讓人大開眼界。
誠如作者所言，成吉思汗允許其子民各自信仰其宗教。但是這不代表成吉思汗尊重所有的宗教儀軌與做法，而且也曾發布禁令干涉這些信眾的做法。例如本書作者曾提過成吉思汗反對以割喉、放血至死的方式宰殺動物。但是他沒有提到的是，成吉思汗曾經發布關於回回（包括穆斯林與猶太人）宰殺牲畜習慣的禁令。蒙古人傳統宰殺牲畜的做法是在牲畜胸部切開一道口子，伸手入胸腔掐斷心臟主動脈使牲畜斃命，而且讓血留在體內。以符合蒙古人不濺血於地的習慣。但穆斯林與猶太人實行「清真」（halal）或「潔食」（kosher）之法，宰殺牲畜時必須切斷牲畜的頸部動脈，將血放乾，而且在宰殺與食用過程中都必須祝禱。因此蒙古人宰殺的牲畜對回回人而言是不潔的，因而不願食用。根據《元典章》的記載，成吉思汗就曾經因為回回此舉否定了蒙古帝國的權威，故禁止回回抹殺羊的作法，並且強迫他們食用依蒙古傳統宰殺的羊。這道禁令在窩闊台汗與忽必烈汗也都曾被重申。
另外，雖然成吉思汗允許其子民各自信仰其宗教，但並非蒙古帝國境內所有的宗教都能得到大汗的承認，並享有豁免賦役的特權。美國賓州大學東亞系教授艾騖德（Christopher P. Atwood）就表示在蒙古帝國境內允許自由信奉各種宗教的政策應該要與獲得國家認可並且得以豁免賦稅的政策分開討論。根據《元史》記載，往昔僅有五個宗教的神職人員獲得免稅特權：儒家、佛教、基督教、道教與伊斯蘭教。然而考慮到一二三二年才是蒙古最早注意到儒家的時間。因此追溯到成吉思汗時期獲得免稅特權的宗教應該有四個：佛教、基督教、道教與伊斯蘭教。這裡我們可以發現，猶太教是一個特例。猶太教的信仰從未被禁，但是猶太教士則極少獲得免稅待遇或是得到國家的贊助。就我們所知，猶太教士一開始並未得到如同基督徒與穆斯林一般的免稅待遇，一二五一年蒙哥汗即位時再度確認了這項規定。直到一二九一年伊利汗國才給予猶太教徒免稅待遇，而要到一三三○年元朝才確認猶太教為得以免稅的宗教。成吉思汗所尋求的是能夠給予其統治宗教「卡里斯瑪」魅力（Charisma）的特定聖人，而非關注宗教的懺悔或教條。免稅優遇僅僅給予個體而非整個宗教。艾騖德認為宗教寬容並非蒙古宗教政策支持與保護四大宗教背後的主要思想。儒家與猶太教一開始被排除於豁免賦稅的宗教行列之外就是例證。兩者都同樣難以與蒙古的政治哲學相符合。由於儒士並未將其習慣解釋為一種對上天或神的祈禱，因而未被成吉思汗視為神職人員。而猶太教則由於未指向一個現存的國家，因此缺乏上天的確認，即所有真正的宗教都被賦予之至高無上的權力。
綜上所述，成吉思汗所給予其屬民的宗教自由與現代世界所謂的宗教自由的內容與實行上是否如此一致，其實還有值得探討的空間。不過本書從宗教信仰的視角來看待成吉思汗的崛起與蒙古帝國的興衰，以及對成吉思汗主張的宗教自由影響後世美國建國的主張也確實獨樹一幟。成吉思汗與蒙古帝國的歷史總能以各種不同形式，給予後世影響與啟發，我想這也是蒙古史之所以迷人的緣故吧。
October 23, 2016
I don't think there's a historian writing today who is better at finding the gaps in history and turning them inside out for readers' enlightenment as Jack Weatherford. Writing on subjects as diverse as Mongols and Native Americans, Weatherford never fails to instruct, never fails to illumine.
Weatherford is on familiar ground with Quest for God is his fourth book on Genghis Khan and the Mongols, and having previously read Ghengis Khan and the Making of the Modern World, I wasn't sure if there was anything new to learn.
Boy was I wrong.
We don't think of Genghis Khan in any sort of religious context. To the Western mind Mongolia was far from the centers of religious practice--China, India, the Middle East. But in Weatherford's deft hand, Mongola was a crossroads of many ideas at the time Timujin became Genghis Khan--Manicheanism, Islam, Taoism--and it would only become more religiously diverse as Genghis's empire expanded and he invited scholars of all faiths to instruct and debate in his presence, all the while refusing to acknowledge any god other than the steppe's blue ocean of sky and brown expanse of land.
Weatherford traces the source of Genghis's religion to the abandonment of his mother and brothers as a young boy. Banished to a hill called Burkhan Khaldun, Genghis would there find his destiny. Once he began to conquer the tribes around him and unite the Mongols, he would return here, time and again, to affirm his destiny, granted not by any sage, seer, or mystic, but by heaven itself.
As Genghis Khan's empire expanded, then, he met all religions with equanimity, admiring the literacy and numeracy of Muslim clerics, the administrative skills of Confucians, and incorporating Jews and Syriac Christians into the wheels of power. The Mongols, never numerous enough to populate the lands they conquered, left most religious systems in place--all the while gutting political and religious elites (who were often corrupt and out of touch anyway).
Weatherford provides several in-depth looks at Genghis Khan's flirtation with Taoism, provided by contemporary chroniclers. In his final chapters, he marks the Mongols' impact on Buddhism, even to the point that the name, "Dalai Lama," is a Mongolian title that stems from their word for "sea."
Ultimately, Genghis Khan's empire was divided among his descendants and ultimately fell. During the Enlightenment, however, European thinkers led by Voltaire took a new look at him and celebrated his policies of religious freedom, which must have seemed attractive after a century of religious warfare. Both George Washington and Thomas Jefferson had biographies of Khan in their libraries, and Weatherford connects this influence with Jefferson's own charter on religious freedom in Virginia, which would pave the way for the First Amendment.
This is a fascinating book, no matter where one lives in the world. Special thanks to NetGalley for providing me with an advanced galley in exchange for an honest review.
Weatherford is on familiar ground with Quest for God is his fourth book on Genghis Khan and the Mongols, and having previously read Ghengis Khan and the Making of the Modern World, I wasn't sure if there was anything new to learn.
Boy was I wrong.
We don't think of Genghis Khan in any sort of religious context. To the Western mind Mongolia was far from the centers of religious practice--China, India, the Middle East. But in Weatherford's deft hand, Mongola was a crossroads of many ideas at the time Timujin became Genghis Khan--Manicheanism, Islam, Taoism--and it would only become more religiously diverse as Genghis's empire expanded and he invited scholars of all faiths to instruct and debate in his presence, all the while refusing to acknowledge any god other than the steppe's blue ocean of sky and brown expanse of land.
Weatherford traces the source of Genghis's religion to the abandonment of his mother and brothers as a young boy. Banished to a hill called Burkhan Khaldun, Genghis would there find his destiny. Once he began to conquer the tribes around him and unite the Mongols, he would return here, time and again, to affirm his destiny, granted not by any sage, seer, or mystic, but by heaven itself.
As Genghis Khan's empire expanded, then, he met all religions with equanimity, admiring the literacy and numeracy of Muslim clerics, the administrative skills of Confucians, and incorporating Jews and Syriac Christians into the wheels of power. The Mongols, never numerous enough to populate the lands they conquered, left most religious systems in place--all the while gutting political and religious elites (who were often corrupt and out of touch anyway).
Weatherford provides several in-depth looks at Genghis Khan's flirtation with Taoism, provided by contemporary chroniclers. In his final chapters, he marks the Mongols' impact on Buddhism, even to the point that the name, "Dalai Lama," is a Mongolian title that stems from their word for "sea."
Ultimately, Genghis Khan's empire was divided among his descendants and ultimately fell. During the Enlightenment, however, European thinkers led by Voltaire took a new look at him and celebrated his policies of religious freedom, which must have seemed attractive after a century of religious warfare. Both George Washington and Thomas Jefferson had biographies of Khan in their libraries, and Weatherford connects this influence with Jefferson's own charter on religious freedom in Virginia, which would pave the way for the First Amendment.
This is a fascinating book, no matter where one lives in the world. Special thanks to NetGalley for providing me with an advanced galley in exchange for an honest review.
August 19, 2024
TLDR: 4.5 stars for girlypopifying Genghis Khan into an open-minded guy just trying to find his fave religion by conquering one people at a time & thank-you-nexting half the planet into a reign of religious tolerance. Fun hilights include Genghis Khan on manifesting (delulu), being God’s fave weapon (main character alert), and founding an unhinged (read: murderous) debate series.
* * * *
This text was born of the hypothesis that since the Secret History of the Mongols was circulating in Western capitals and read by founding fathers during the mid-18th century, is it possible that Genghis Khan rather than Locke was the inspiration for Jefferson’s insistence on the separation of church and state?
Weatherford is the contemporary Western expert and has all my admiration, but he pulls a bit of a bait and switch by never bringing this up again until the epilogue and instead marching on with a charming reframing of Genghis Khan’s conquests. He frames Genghis Khan as a man that, because of the conditions of his difficult upbringing, constantly looked for spiritual guidance and through that attempted to learn about the religions of all of the peoples he meets and conquers. He surrounded himself with religious scholars and encouraged public debates to “settle” questions and promote religious harmony, unable to grasp the inexplicable and blinding quality of belief that doesn’t bow to logic. His fundamental miscalculation of religion is that the religious scholars were looking for enlightenment, whereas he was just looking for common sense. The peak of this was the religious debate during the 1254 Mongol Olympics in which Muslims & Christian’s vs Taoists vs Buddhists nearly ended in mass arrest & bloodshed.
Fun note- he stopped invading so many places for goods and riches once he found out he could just request/send a trade caravan. (Amazon prime saving lives)
Thoroughly researched, written to engage, and five stars for a novel approach.
* * * *
Quotes:
What began as a personal struggle to find his own spiritual core gradually became a quest to understand the role of religion in society. …the more he came to believe that no empire could be stable so long as men were allowed to kill or be killed for their faith.
☀️ The Mongols believed that God spoke through those to whom He gave power, and that He entrusted Genghis Khan with the task of ensuring happiness and peace from sunrise to sunset.
⛈️ (to conquered leaders) You have committed great sins…If you ask me what proof I have for these words, I say, because ✨I am the punishment of God. ✨ If you had not committed great sins, God would have sent a punishment like me upon you.
📚It takes seven mistakes to learn one lesson
✖️(on bride kidnapping) a society in which men were eager to fight over everything, especially control of women.
🧐 If there was a river that could not be crossed, do not think of how to cross it. It is only necessary to want to cross it, and you will pass through.
🩷 “I have never forgotten you,” he wrote the letter from Afghanistan. “Do not forget me.”
* * * *
This text was born of the hypothesis that since the Secret History of the Mongols was circulating in Western capitals and read by founding fathers during the mid-18th century, is it possible that Genghis Khan rather than Locke was the inspiration for Jefferson’s insistence on the separation of church and state?
Weatherford is the contemporary Western expert and has all my admiration, but he pulls a bit of a bait and switch by never bringing this up again until the epilogue and instead marching on with a charming reframing of Genghis Khan’s conquests. He frames Genghis Khan as a man that, because of the conditions of his difficult upbringing, constantly looked for spiritual guidance and through that attempted to learn about the religions of all of the peoples he meets and conquers. He surrounded himself with religious scholars and encouraged public debates to “settle” questions and promote religious harmony, unable to grasp the inexplicable and blinding quality of belief that doesn’t bow to logic. His fundamental miscalculation of religion is that the religious scholars were looking for enlightenment, whereas he was just looking for common sense. The peak of this was the religious debate during the 1254 Mongol Olympics in which Muslims & Christian’s vs Taoists vs Buddhists nearly ended in mass arrest & bloodshed.
Fun note- he stopped invading so many places for goods and riches once he found out he could just request/send a trade caravan. (Amazon prime saving lives)
Thoroughly researched, written to engage, and five stars for a novel approach.
* * * *
Quotes:
What began as a personal struggle to find his own spiritual core gradually became a quest to understand the role of religion in society. …the more he came to believe that no empire could be stable so long as men were allowed to kill or be killed for their faith.
☀️ The Mongols believed that God spoke through those to whom He gave power, and that He entrusted Genghis Khan with the task of ensuring happiness and peace from sunrise to sunset.
⛈️ (to conquered leaders) You have committed great sins…If you ask me what proof I have for these words, I say, because ✨I am the punishment of God. ✨ If you had not committed great sins, God would have sent a punishment like me upon you.
📚It takes seven mistakes to learn one lesson
✖️(on bride kidnapping) a society in which men were eager to fight over everything, especially control of women.
🧐 If there was a river that could not be crossed, do not think of how to cross it. It is only necessary to want to cross it, and you will pass through.
🩷 “I have never forgotten you,” he wrote the letter from Afghanistan. “Do not forget me.”
November 10, 2021
Really an interesting book. Like many in the West, I think, I knew very little about Genghis Khan, most of it along the lines of "brutal barbarian conqueror," and so forth. Jack Weatherford ran across a single footnote in Volume III of Gibbon's massive 6-volume "Decline and Fall of the Roman
Empire" indicating that the religious tolerance Genghis Khan built in to his empire, more as a practical administrative tool than on any religious or philosophical grounds, influenced the philosophy of John Locke, which in turn had an influence on the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
For those who want to go deeper into this story, Weatherford includes copious footnotes, an annotated list of references, and a detailed index. One of the many interesting facets of Genghis Khan was the extent to which women, including his mother and many of his several wives, held real power in his empire. He has written another book, "The Secret History of the Mongol Queens: How the Daughters of Genghis Khan Rescued His Empire," about these powerful women.
Empire" indicating that the religious tolerance Genghis Khan built in to his empire, more as a practical administrative tool than on any religious or philosophical grounds, influenced the philosophy of John Locke, which in turn had an influence on the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
For those who want to go deeper into this story, Weatherford includes copious footnotes, an annotated list of references, and a detailed index. One of the many interesting facets of Genghis Khan was the extent to which women, including his mother and many of his several wives, held real power in his empire. He has written another book, "The Secret History of the Mongol Queens: How the Daughters of Genghis Khan Rescued His Empire," about these powerful women.
February 3, 2017
Weatherford is not a historian, and his adulation by the Mongolian government seems to have gotten to his head where he seemingly has no more objectivity towards the Mongols anymore. As a book, it's less engaging than its predecessors, with a bunch of errors and weird writing decisions visible even on a quick read through, including mixing old and new forms of Mongolian, using weird etymologies etc. I think this book pissed me off more than entertain me.
March 15, 2018
Weatherford is a Genghis Kahn apologist. He does a good job at showing through well studied accounts how the Mongols dealt with religion in the empire, but I don't buy his argument that GK was doing this out of some idealism. The idealism that he later proposes inspired the first American thinkers. This book is great for getting an idea on what the Mongol spiritual mind was like. But it often over glosses or even ignores the shear cataclysmic brutality of the empire.
August 31, 2020
Despite not proving (at all) the attestation that Genghis Khan gave 'us' religious freedom, this was a page-turning good read of BASIC and fundamental Mongol military and religious history during the reign of the great Genghis Khan and his immediate descendants. Worth reading and would recommend to anyone with a blooming interest in said period/people or in religions and how they spread.
3.5/5
3.5/5
September 10, 2022
If you are looking for a book that can help you see religion with new eyes, this book is a good choice!
May 11, 2021
This book was illuminating and I learned a lot about Genghis Khan and his approach to life.
My notes:
Mongols' religion
-The Mongols did not worship anthromorphised deities. They recognised no god in human form with arms or legs, head or face, or any deity that spoke to them in words. They simply acknowledged a supreme, divine power over the universe, an ineffable sacred presence without form or word that saturated the world. Pg 30
- They did not ascribe the human emotions of jealousy and anger to beings in the sky. They believed that each person contained a part of the divine essence of the universe, and from this divinity, each soul possessed a basic morality beyond anything that could be contained in human words or inscribed into law. Pg 30
- In Mongolian language, the forest, in addition to measuring the years of a child's life, literally holds the collected wisdom of the Earth. It also means 'mind' and 'memory'. Pg 31
Mongols on Christianity
-Furthermore, Temujin upheld his animist beliefs that spirits were everywhere, while Christians believed the word of God was in their books, as though thy had trapped God and now contained him in a small, portable box bound in leather. Only the Christian priests could read the holy scriptures or hear the voice of God. The priests controlled access to God, but they greedily sold this access to those with money and power. In contrast, Mongols believed that heaven spoke to them directly to them on mountaintops and from trees, but not through a book. They communicated with gods and spirits regularly and were frustrated when Christians failed to answer basic, practical questions about scriptures they quoted and memorised. Pg 109
-The nomadic Christians of the Mongol steppe did not share the Western Christianity's fondness for paintings or sculpture. They particularly rejected Christian art because it depicted the worst imaginable human acts of torture and martyrdom (people being beheaded, boiled in pots, crucified, eaten by savage beasts, strangled, tortured on the rack, broken on the wheel, pulled asunder by enimals, shot with arrows, pierced with lances, starved, fed to lions, sealed alive in tombs, whipped, raped, skinned alive, eviscerated, burned at the stake, thrown from high places).Western Christians not only wrote stories, sang songs and made pictures of suffering; they eagerly collected the blood, broken bones, dried skin, hair, and other body parts of their holy martyrs and prayed to them.
The nomads, in contrast, believed that to mention evil or depict suffering only created more evil and suffering. They particularly abhorred depictions of Jesus nailed on a cross, bleeding from his crown of thorns, or with his side pierced by a spear. Images of a tortured God defied their moral sensibility. For them, God was the sky, or heaven, not a person.
The Christian notion of individual salvation mystified and frightened Mongols because it conflicted with the strong communitarian ideals of steppe culture. Most Mongols did not dare even to sleep alone at night, and so to imagine eternity in a supposed paradise without their family or close companions was horrifying. To become an orphan was considered life's worst fate, and getting separated from the group terrified them. Why, the Mongols wondered, would a religion reward believers with a heaven that their parents, grandparents and ancestors had not been allowed to enter? Pg 111
Completion
The important aspect of any deed or action is not intention but successful completion. No matter how good the plans, how strong the desire, how great the effort, in the end, success alone matters. Heaven does not need prayers, offerings, and chanting; it needs action. P 141
The Mongols refrain from using words such as death and dying, and instead subsitute the euphemism 'becoming a god'. Genghis Khan did not die as a Buddhist, Muslim, Christian, Taoist or disciple of any one religion. He died a Mongol. P 276
My notes:
Mongols' religion
-The Mongols did not worship anthromorphised deities. They recognised no god in human form with arms or legs, head or face, or any deity that spoke to them in words. They simply acknowledged a supreme, divine power over the universe, an ineffable sacred presence without form or word that saturated the world. Pg 30
- They did not ascribe the human emotions of jealousy and anger to beings in the sky. They believed that each person contained a part of the divine essence of the universe, and from this divinity, each soul possessed a basic morality beyond anything that could be contained in human words or inscribed into law. Pg 30
- In Mongolian language, the forest, in addition to measuring the years of a child's life, literally holds the collected wisdom of the Earth. It also means 'mind' and 'memory'. Pg 31
Mongols on Christianity
-Furthermore, Temujin upheld his animist beliefs that spirits were everywhere, while Christians believed the word of God was in their books, as though thy had trapped God and now contained him in a small, portable box bound in leather. Only the Christian priests could read the holy scriptures or hear the voice of God. The priests controlled access to God, but they greedily sold this access to those with money and power. In contrast, Mongols believed that heaven spoke to them directly to them on mountaintops and from trees, but not through a book. They communicated with gods and spirits regularly and were frustrated when Christians failed to answer basic, practical questions about scriptures they quoted and memorised. Pg 109
-The nomadic Christians of the Mongol steppe did not share the Western Christianity's fondness for paintings or sculpture. They particularly rejected Christian art because it depicted the worst imaginable human acts of torture and martyrdom (people being beheaded, boiled in pots, crucified, eaten by savage beasts, strangled, tortured on the rack, broken on the wheel, pulled asunder by enimals, shot with arrows, pierced with lances, starved, fed to lions, sealed alive in tombs, whipped, raped, skinned alive, eviscerated, burned at the stake, thrown from high places).Western Christians not only wrote stories, sang songs and made pictures of suffering; they eagerly collected the blood, broken bones, dried skin, hair, and other body parts of their holy martyrs and prayed to them.
The nomads, in contrast, believed that to mention evil or depict suffering only created more evil and suffering. They particularly abhorred depictions of Jesus nailed on a cross, bleeding from his crown of thorns, or with his side pierced by a spear. Images of a tortured God defied their moral sensibility. For them, God was the sky, or heaven, not a person.
The Christian notion of individual salvation mystified and frightened Mongols because it conflicted with the strong communitarian ideals of steppe culture. Most Mongols did not dare even to sleep alone at night, and so to imagine eternity in a supposed paradise without their family or close companions was horrifying. To become an orphan was considered life's worst fate, and getting separated from the group terrified them. Why, the Mongols wondered, would a religion reward believers with a heaven that their parents, grandparents and ancestors had not been allowed to enter? Pg 111
Completion
The important aspect of any deed or action is not intention but successful completion. No matter how good the plans, how strong the desire, how great the effort, in the end, success alone matters. Heaven does not need prayers, offerings, and chanting; it needs action. P 141
The Mongols refrain from using words such as death and dying, and instead subsitute the euphemism 'becoming a god'. Genghis Khan did not die as a Buddhist, Muslim, Christian, Taoist or disciple of any one religion. He died a Mongol. P 276
February 23, 2021
From Voltaire on, Genghis Khan has gotten a bad rap in the Western world. Jack Weatherford, in a follow-up to his original volume on the Mongol conquerer, has rectified that.
Genghis Khan was no more bloodthirsty than any other world leader of his day and age, and possibly less so. He was certainly no Tamerlane.
Weatherford has covered some of this, and some of Genghis Khan's influence outside his empire, in his previous volume. Now, he takes a look at Genghis Khan and his interaction with several of the great world religions from the cockpit of Central Asia.
For the unfamiliar, Nestorian Christianity had penetrated here centuries before Islam. Jews were also here. And, within the Muslim world, the panoply of divisions within Sunni and Shia were here by this time also. Then, as Temujin's conquests led due south and southeast, he had to sort through Buddhist, Taoist and (not a religion) Confucian plays for his allegiance and support in China.
Khan generally navigated these shoals well and refused to commit himself to any one religion, while supporting freedom for all to operate.
The epilogue is worth a read all on its own. I already knew a fair amount of Veep Henry Wallace's nuttery; I didn't realize that, during WWII, he flew into Mongolia to see Genghis Khan's home grounds as part of a quest for the mystical Buddhism into which Tibetan Buddhists had "incorporated" him, courtesy of a successor who founded a short-lived empire that included part of Tibet in the early 1700s. This explains the background to the Roerich Letters, which did not become public until 1947, but were known by leading Dems and Repubs in 1940 and is part of why FDR was pressured to drop him in 1944.
That said, it's a stretch to say Khan "gave us religious freedom," and I'm assuming Weatherford had a hand in the subtitle himself. While the likes of Thomas Jefferson and Ben Franklin may have referenced him as an icon of religious freedom, what gave the US religious freedom was several other things. They include:
1. The general Western European horrors of religious war after the Thirty Years War;
2. Different Protestant stances in different US colonies, plus the Catholicism in Maryland and Quakers in Pennsylvania leading the Constitutional Founders to prescribe freedom of religion for FEDERAL laws and candidates. (Some New England states had "state religion" well into the 1800s.)
3. Related to the above, the lack of a state church because of the lack of a monarch, in part.
I'm also sure that Weatherford is not the only western scholar to see Khan's "Great Taboo." Since we still don't know exactly where he was buried, nobody could see that. As far as the general area, Ikh Khorig was opened to Western (Japanese included as the first) archaeologists and other scientists starting in 1989.
So, the book is "nice." It's not all that. I would consider 3.5 stars if available.
Genghis Khan was no more bloodthirsty than any other world leader of his day and age, and possibly less so. He was certainly no Tamerlane.
Weatherford has covered some of this, and some of Genghis Khan's influence outside his empire, in his previous volume. Now, he takes a look at Genghis Khan and his interaction with several of the great world religions from the cockpit of Central Asia.
For the unfamiliar, Nestorian Christianity had penetrated here centuries before Islam. Jews were also here. And, within the Muslim world, the panoply of divisions within Sunni and Shia were here by this time also. Then, as Temujin's conquests led due south and southeast, he had to sort through Buddhist, Taoist and (not a religion) Confucian plays for his allegiance and support in China.
Khan generally navigated these shoals well and refused to commit himself to any one religion, while supporting freedom for all to operate.
The epilogue is worth a read all on its own. I already knew a fair amount of Veep Henry Wallace's nuttery; I didn't realize that, during WWII, he flew into Mongolia to see Genghis Khan's home grounds as part of a quest for the mystical Buddhism into which Tibetan Buddhists had "incorporated" him, courtesy of a successor who founded a short-lived empire that included part of Tibet in the early 1700s. This explains the background to the Roerich Letters, which did not become public until 1947, but were known by leading Dems and Repubs in 1940 and is part of why FDR was pressured to drop him in 1944.
That said, it's a stretch to say Khan "gave us religious freedom," and I'm assuming Weatherford had a hand in the subtitle himself. While the likes of Thomas Jefferson and Ben Franklin may have referenced him as an icon of religious freedom, what gave the US religious freedom was several other things. They include:
1. The general Western European horrors of religious war after the Thirty Years War;
2. Different Protestant stances in different US colonies, plus the Catholicism in Maryland and Quakers in Pennsylvania leading the Constitutional Founders to prescribe freedom of religion for FEDERAL laws and candidates. (Some New England states had "state religion" well into the 1800s.)
3. Related to the above, the lack of a state church because of the lack of a monarch, in part.
I'm also sure that Weatherford is not the only western scholar to see Khan's "Great Taboo." Since we still don't know exactly where he was buried, nobody could see that. As far as the general area, Ikh Khorig was opened to Western (Japanese included as the first) archaeologists and other scientists starting in 1989.
So, the book is "nice." It's not all that. I would consider 3.5 stars if available.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 118 reviews