What do you think?
Rate this book
Russia and the Golden Horde: The Mongol Impact on Medieval Russian History
" . . . an imaginative and dispassionate re-examination of the significance of the Mongol Conquest and its aftermath for Russia's historical development." ―Slavic Review
"On all counts Russia and the Golden Horde infuses the subject with fresh insights and interpretations." ―History
"Combining rigorous analysis of the major scholarly findings with his own research, Halperin has produced both a much-needed synthesis and an important original work." ―Library Journal
"Halperin's new book combines sound scholarship and a flair for storytelling that should help publicize this all too unfamiliar tale in the West." ―Virginia Quarterly Review
"It is a seminal work that will be repeatedly cited in the future . . . " ―The Historian
" . . . ingenious and highly articulate . . . " ―Russian Review
"On all counts Russia and the Golden Horde infuses the subject with fresh insights and interpretations." ―History
"Combining rigorous analysis of the major scholarly findings with his own research, Halperin has produced both a much-needed synthesis and an important original work." ―Library Journal
"Halperin's new book combines sound scholarship and a flair for storytelling that should help publicize this all too unfamiliar tale in the West." ―Virginia Quarterly Review
"It is a seminal work that will be repeatedly cited in the future . . . " ―The Historian
" . . . ingenious and highly articulate . . . " ―Russian Review
192 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1985
42 people are currently reading
609 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 24 of 24 reviews
Read
January 9, 2023In 1575 Ivan the Terrible abdicated as Tsar in favour of one Symeon Bekbulatovich. Symeon was a Chingisid, a descendant of Genghis Khan.
Halperin's book aims to show why such a seemingly bizarre action might have been an explicable piece of political theatre in sixteenth century Russia by examining both the complexities of Mongol influence and the relative silence of the Russian sources. It is a good introduction to a complex and engaging subject.
The starting point is the idea of an ideology of silence. History was recorded by churchmen writing in an explicitly Christian context and in common with the rest of Europe portrayed relations between Christians and non-Christians as dominated by conflict, preferring to ignore and remain silent about non-warlike, peaceful relations which have to be inferred from the sources.
Halperin shows that the Russian sources took an ideology of silence further than other medieval Christian writers by attempting to largely ignore the fact of the conquest of the Russian Princes in the early 1240s by using the same language as they had done to describe earlier conflicts between the Russians and the Polovtsy, using terms like raiding or plundering and ignoring the reality of being a part of the Mongol Empire until it was coming to end in the second half of the fifteenth century.
Naturally the argument turns on the nature of the source material. At places Halperin comes across as sweeping in his judgements but then again he was engaging with deep rooted models, taking issue with Karamzin and Solovyov who wrote at the beginning and towards the end of the nineteenth century respectively.
The subject of the "Tatar Yoke" (as much as the question of Russia's origins) has tended to have wide ranging political resonances and it is noteworthy how much Halperin attributes to internal developments within the Moscow state, whether that be the decline of town assemblies, the rise of the nobility and the development of the autocratic rule of the Grand Princes (later Tsars) that has often being blamed on the Mongol influence instead. Some of his views have been nuanced since, for instance Ostrowsky in Muscovy and the Mongols argues that the seclusion of elite Muscovite women in the Terem was a custom adopted from Byzantium rather than a local innovation, or copied from steppe peoples.
Ivan the Terrible's abdication didn't last long, he formally restored himself as Tsar in 1576, but the incident suggests something of the enduring complexities of the relations between the conquered and the conquerors.
January 2022
I reread this book in part because I was thinking of letting it go, I had read, possibly just parts of, it as a student and years later discovered a copy at a book fair in a church hall for the price of one pound (or possibly four pounds depending on how the handwriting is interpreted).
Rereading it strikes me more as an extended essay than a book, there are barely 120 pages of text and some of the chapters in my opinion could be cut entirely, not because they lack interest, but because they go beyond what the primary source material can substantiate.
I also turned to this book again because of the war in Ukraine I had been listening to the lecture course by Timothy Schnyder on The making of modern Ukraine - which you can find and audit for free and without registration on the internet, while it is an interesting series, his emphasis on the Ukraine having experienced European movements like the renaissance, reformation, and the baroque, creates the implication that Russia is not a European but an Asian state. Something that Halperin's book does is show that Asian states are not monolithic, but highly varied, and that the grand principality of Moscow and later Russia were not very much like either the Golden Horde or it's successor states. This in turn points to the incredible and surprisingly subtle impacts of the Mongols upon the societies that they conquered.
Again reading again I find myself less comfortable with the argument about the ideology of silence. It strikes me as slightly tricky to say that absence of evidence is evidence of a phenomenon. The problem is the limitation of the source material and ultimately most issues in early Russian history come back to that problem. Perhaps though that simply adds to the attraction of the subject matter, the less certain the facts, the greater the space for imagination and creative interpretation.
Halperin's book aims to show why such a seemingly bizarre action might have been an explicable piece of political theatre in sixteenth century Russia by examining both the complexities of Mongol influence and the relative silence of the Russian sources. It is a good introduction to a complex and engaging subject.
The starting point is the idea of an ideology of silence. History was recorded by churchmen writing in an explicitly Christian context and in common with the rest of Europe portrayed relations between Christians and non-Christians as dominated by conflict, preferring to ignore and remain silent about non-warlike, peaceful relations which have to be inferred from the sources.
Halperin shows that the Russian sources took an ideology of silence further than other medieval Christian writers by attempting to largely ignore the fact of the conquest of the Russian Princes in the early 1240s by using the same language as they had done to describe earlier conflicts between the Russians and the Polovtsy, using terms like raiding or plundering and ignoring the reality of being a part of the Mongol Empire until it was coming to end in the second half of the fifteenth century.
Naturally the argument turns on the nature of the source material. At places Halperin comes across as sweeping in his judgements but then again he was engaging with deep rooted models, taking issue with Karamzin and Solovyov who wrote at the beginning and towards the end of the nineteenth century respectively.
The subject of the "Tatar Yoke" (as much as the question of Russia's origins) has tended to have wide ranging political resonances and it is noteworthy how much Halperin attributes to internal developments within the Moscow state, whether that be the decline of town assemblies, the rise of the nobility and the development of the autocratic rule of the Grand Princes (later Tsars) that has often being blamed on the Mongol influence instead. Some of his views have been nuanced since, for instance Ostrowsky in Muscovy and the Mongols argues that the seclusion of elite Muscovite women in the Terem was a custom adopted from Byzantium rather than a local innovation, or copied from steppe peoples.
Ivan the Terrible's abdication didn't last long, he formally restored himself as Tsar in 1576, but the incident suggests something of the enduring complexities of the relations between the conquered and the conquerors.
January 2022
I reread this book in part because I was thinking of letting it go, I had read, possibly just parts of, it as a student and years later discovered a copy at a book fair in a church hall for the price of one pound (or possibly four pounds depending on how the handwriting is interpreted).
Rereading it strikes me more as an extended essay than a book, there are barely 120 pages of text and some of the chapters in my opinion could be cut entirely, not because they lack interest, but because they go beyond what the primary source material can substantiate.
I also turned to this book again because of the war in Ukraine I had been listening to the lecture course by Timothy Schnyder on The making of modern Ukraine - which you can find and audit for free and without registration on the internet, while it is an interesting series, his emphasis on the Ukraine having experienced European movements like the renaissance, reformation, and the baroque, creates the implication that Russia is not a European but an Asian state. Something that Halperin's book does is show that Asian states are not monolithic, but highly varied, and that the grand principality of Moscow and later Russia were not very much like either the Golden Horde or it's successor states. This in turn points to the incredible and surprisingly subtle impacts of the Mongols upon the societies that they conquered.
Again reading again I find myself less comfortable with the argument about the ideology of silence. It strikes me as slightly tricky to say that absence of evidence is evidence of a phenomenon. The problem is the limitation of the source material and ultimately most issues in early Russian history come back to that problem. Perhaps though that simply adds to the attraction of the subject matter, the less certain the facts, the greater the space for imagination and creative interpretation.
June 11, 2007
This was an excellent introduction into the impact of the Mongolian imperialists in Russia both at the time of their domination (which was 200 years - an incredible period of time), and in their lasting effect on Russian life and culture since - in some ways quite obvious but in others more subtle and archaic. I was most interested in the shift of seat of power from Kiev to Russia and how this came about.
July 7, 2019
This brief book shows how Russia was able to act as if they were unconquered even as they sometimes interacted with their conquerors. They could speak of bitter resistance even as some intermarried with the Mongols. The Mongols were, in effect, an absent presence.
October 11, 2009
In his text "Russia and the Golden Horde," Charles Halperin effectively investigates the developments within Russian society under Mongol rule. Halperin argues that prior scholarship regarding this period has been distorted by academic bias and misleading source material, mechanisms that have created a false sense of brutality and stagnation towards the era. As he states "An unfortunate combination of circumstances involving the nature of the historical record and centuries-old prejudices has led many historians to dismiss this period as one in which Russian society was in a state of suspended animation or of cultural and economic decay." Instead, Halperin asserts that Mongol rule over the Russians involved a much more complex relationship that was simultaneously both mutually beneficial and destructive for the respective societies.
One of the most important aspects to understanding the Russian response to Mongol domination is the geographic and cultural situation of Russia in relation to foreign entities. The Russian people established themselves in a relatively permeable location that that was influenced by both Western and Eastern societies. In many respects they were a component of the European commonwealth of nations through their acceptance of Byzantine Christianity, and yet they also maintained regular affiliations with the Islamic caliphate and various steppe tribes. The consequence of this interaction was a cosmopolitan attitude of cooperation and tolerance that was predicated upon economic and political imperatives. As Halperin contends, "It was often expedient for each side, when warring with one group of infidels, to make alliances with another...In the interest of profit, visitors and hosts alike learned to make concessions to each other's faiths, diets, and customs. The obvious benefits of cooperation demanded social and cultural accommodation." Through this early collaboration, Russian society was exposed to foreign sensibilities and thus not overwhelmed by the social differences that accompanied the arrival of the Mongols.
The previous system of interaction also influenced the manner in which the Russians perceived their subjugation by the Mongols, allowing them to consider the embarrassment rather less humiliating than would otherwise be expected. Because of the frequency in which the Russian military confronted the forces of outside tribes and nations, occasionally even experiencing defeat, "Russian writers recorded the events of the Mongol period within the conceptual framework evolved during the Kievan period...Through an adept and remarkably consistent use of language, in which they eschewed the terminology of conquest and even of liberation, the bookmen avoided coming to grips with the ideological conundrum of their own defeat." This view was also encouraged by the nature of the Mongol structure of occupation itself. Unlike other conquests where victors installed themselves directly as aristocratic leadership over a captured province, the Mongols did not directly garrison the whole of Russian territory. On the contrary, because of the proximity of nearby nomadic steppe armies, the Mongols found it more efficient to govern from outside Russia itself. Halperin condenses this circumstance by contending "The result for Russia was prolonged subjugation to Mongols whose cavalry remained as deadly as ever...Russia nonetheless was left, to a degree, to its own devices."
The ultimate ramifications of the Mongol domination are somewhat difficult to ascertain given the complex relations which defined the connection between Russia and the Golden Horde. Assuredly, the conflict initially involved enormous losses for the Russians, both in regards to property and human life. Yet this destruction eventually progressed into a restructuring of the Russian commercial system which allowed economic practices to flourish. Tangible examples of this phenomenon include the increasing wealth of the Russian Orthodox Church as a result of Mongol patronage, and the rise of Moscow as a political center due to the adoption of various Tatar establishments. Haleprin resolves this dichotomy by explaining "Unquestionably, the conquest was a catastrophe, but a catastrophe need not have permanent effects. The Russian economy recovered from the devastating campaigns of 1237-1240 and survived the harsh regimen of taxation and exploitation that followed. Furthermore, by fostering international trade, especially with the Orient, the Golden Horde fostered the resurgence of the Russian economy and the subsequent growth of Russian power."
The legacy of the Mongol conquest continues to be a subject hotly debated by scholars in the field of Russian history. Some consider the period to be responsible for the "backwardness" which dominated Russia in relation to Europe for the next several centuries. Others see the era as a masked blessing which provided Russian society with the elements to successfully expand and diversify. Both approaches however, concur in that they respect the repercussions, positive or negative, that the Mongols had on the Russian nation. Halperin states "The Horde's bureaucratic evolution, foreign policies, and internal politics all had enormously important consequences for Russia and must be part of any coherent vision of the times." Arguably, the legacy of the Golden Horde is equally pertinent to a holistic understanding of many modern Russian institutions and attitudes as well.
One of the most important aspects to understanding the Russian response to Mongol domination is the geographic and cultural situation of Russia in relation to foreign entities. The Russian people established themselves in a relatively permeable location that that was influenced by both Western and Eastern societies. In many respects they were a component of the European commonwealth of nations through their acceptance of Byzantine Christianity, and yet they also maintained regular affiliations with the Islamic caliphate and various steppe tribes. The consequence of this interaction was a cosmopolitan attitude of cooperation and tolerance that was predicated upon economic and political imperatives. As Halperin contends, "It was often expedient for each side, when warring with one group of infidels, to make alliances with another...In the interest of profit, visitors and hosts alike learned to make concessions to each other's faiths, diets, and customs. The obvious benefits of cooperation demanded social and cultural accommodation." Through this early collaboration, Russian society was exposed to foreign sensibilities and thus not overwhelmed by the social differences that accompanied the arrival of the Mongols.
The previous system of interaction also influenced the manner in which the Russians perceived their subjugation by the Mongols, allowing them to consider the embarrassment rather less humiliating than would otherwise be expected. Because of the frequency in which the Russian military confronted the forces of outside tribes and nations, occasionally even experiencing defeat, "Russian writers recorded the events of the Mongol period within the conceptual framework evolved during the Kievan period...Through an adept and remarkably consistent use of language, in which they eschewed the terminology of conquest and even of liberation, the bookmen avoided coming to grips with the ideological conundrum of their own defeat." This view was also encouraged by the nature of the Mongol structure of occupation itself. Unlike other conquests where victors installed themselves directly as aristocratic leadership over a captured province, the Mongols did not directly garrison the whole of Russian territory. On the contrary, because of the proximity of nearby nomadic steppe armies, the Mongols found it more efficient to govern from outside Russia itself. Halperin condenses this circumstance by contending "The result for Russia was prolonged subjugation to Mongols whose cavalry remained as deadly as ever...Russia nonetheless was left, to a degree, to its own devices."
The ultimate ramifications of the Mongol domination are somewhat difficult to ascertain given the complex relations which defined the connection between Russia and the Golden Horde. Assuredly, the conflict initially involved enormous losses for the Russians, both in regards to property and human life. Yet this destruction eventually progressed into a restructuring of the Russian commercial system which allowed economic practices to flourish. Tangible examples of this phenomenon include the increasing wealth of the Russian Orthodox Church as a result of Mongol patronage, and the rise of Moscow as a political center due to the adoption of various Tatar establishments. Haleprin resolves this dichotomy by explaining "Unquestionably, the conquest was a catastrophe, but a catastrophe need not have permanent effects. The Russian economy recovered from the devastating campaigns of 1237-1240 and survived the harsh regimen of taxation and exploitation that followed. Furthermore, by fostering international trade, especially with the Orient, the Golden Horde fostered the resurgence of the Russian economy and the subsequent growth of Russian power."
The legacy of the Mongol conquest continues to be a subject hotly debated by scholars in the field of Russian history. Some consider the period to be responsible for the "backwardness" which dominated Russia in relation to Europe for the next several centuries. Others see the era as a masked blessing which provided Russian society with the elements to successfully expand and diversify. Both approaches however, concur in that they respect the repercussions, positive or negative, that the Mongols had on the Russian nation. Halperin states "The Horde's bureaucratic evolution, foreign policies, and internal politics all had enormously important consequences for Russia and must be part of any coherent vision of the times." Arguably, the legacy of the Golden Horde is equally pertinent to a holistic understanding of many modern Russian institutions and attitudes as well.
February 19, 2024
I read this in 2005 and loved it.
This Mongol book shed a lot of light on my Lithuanian side.
The Mongols dominated the Princes of Muscovy and that enabled Lithuania to gobble up a good bit of western Russia. Poland was in the mix as an ally. The Poland Lithuanian Commonwealth was the largest country in Europe in the 14th-15th Century or so.
Colorful aspects were the Khazars (Jewish), Volga Borgers (Muslim), Pechenegs, who the pre-Christian East Slavs perceived as not pagan-infidels but as nomads different from themselves.
This book is only 130 pages long, but there are some good sources listed if you want to go beyond this.
Alexander Nevskii was loyal to the Golden Horde and that has been an embarrassment to Russian patriotic historiographers ever since. He had key victories over the Swedes and Teutonic Knights, so there is no denying his military skill.
I am American but have a 1/4 Lithuanian wildcard to my DNA. My Dad's Mom came in 1914 at age 2 and really knew next to nothing about her past.
Not even her birthday, which she celebrated December 24. The Bolsheviks updated the Russian calendar in 1917, so it is kind of a latter-day George Washington situation.
Her Mom died in Indiana in 1923, and things were chaotic after.
I had to read a lot to understand this side of my background.
This book was tremendous.
This Mongol book shed a lot of light on my Lithuanian side.
The Mongols dominated the Princes of Muscovy and that enabled Lithuania to gobble up a good bit of western Russia. Poland was in the mix as an ally. The Poland Lithuanian Commonwealth was the largest country in Europe in the 14th-15th Century or so.
Colorful aspects were the Khazars (Jewish), Volga Borgers (Muslim), Pechenegs, who the pre-Christian East Slavs perceived as not pagan-infidels but as nomads different from themselves.
This book is only 130 pages long, but there are some good sources listed if you want to go beyond this.
Alexander Nevskii was loyal to the Golden Horde and that has been an embarrassment to Russian patriotic historiographers ever since. He had key victories over the Swedes and Teutonic Knights, so there is no denying his military skill.
I am American but have a 1/4 Lithuanian wildcard to my DNA. My Dad's Mom came in 1914 at age 2 and really knew next to nothing about her past.
Not even her birthday, which she celebrated December 24. The Bolsheviks updated the Russian calendar in 1917, so it is kind of a latter-day George Washington situation.
Her Mom died in Indiana in 1923, and things were chaotic after.
I had to read a lot to understand this side of my background.
This book was tremendous.
November 22, 2013
Surprisingly readable, and pretty damn interesting.
October 2, 2023
This is type of book that cannot be written today, due to modern single minded moral watchmen. Interestingly it is book that was published in 1980's at the time when both military-political blocks where prepping up for the end of days, and it seems that in those days these enemies were more respectful to each other and in general cooperative, than is case in our modern days of diversity and tolerance.
This is a very interesting and fantastic analysis of social interaction of two people, one sedentary and other nomadic, for period of about three hundred years. Period in which nomadic people, Mongol Golden Horde, through sheer terror and ruthlessness kept entire Asia and what is today European part of Russia and Ukraine (sedentary people) in political paralysis, always making them live on the edge of the knife and never knowing if Horde will decide to raze the land, cities and entire populations for any sign of resistance or disrespect to their rule, making sure they know that every open act of rebellion might be the last.
Thanks to the geographical location of Rus' lands, Golden Horde did not try to openly control it (as it did in Persia/Iran or China) because it was too much frontier land, but was collecting taxes and constantly engaging various nobility in internal conflict and war with external forces like Lithuania. In exchange, Rus' accepted the situation as is and decided to do something very interesting, something that one might find more when researching individual human behavior when put under unbearable pressure - they decided to negate Golden Horde dominance and just put them into same bucket with other steppe people that spread chaos in the area [but were definitely more short lived when compared to Golden Horde]. Since Golden Horde never took reins of control in Rus' land, this could be done with ease. Apparently, steppe warriors were common in those times that exerting blackmail of destruction and taxes on isolated cities was something that would not excite anyone. Basically Mongol's were collectively negated as a force that had any long lasting effect on the Rus'. For this to work people taking this approach need to be very patient and ready to accept hard times to reach their goal.
And to say this is something unique, it is not. Just note what happened to Nubian/Kushite empire - they were eradicated post-factum. Rus' did this real time for a sole reason that Golden Horde actually did not care what Rus' wrote in their records, as long as they got their money. In contrast, fall of Mongol's in eyes of Persians and Chinese and prestige of being associated with Golden Horde happened when Golden Horde ultimately disintegrated (which is more in line with Egyptian example) - here Mongol's actually controlled these areas and therefore after-the-fact expunge had to take place to keep local pride high.
Even being located on the borders of the huge Golden Horde empire, did not prevent Rus' to flourish in times between rebellions and uprisings and inter-city wars. Under the racket of Golden Horde, huge military force protecting the Silk Road and all means of trade between East and West [that brought huge wealth to the Horde], trade routes brought huge riches and prosperity (even to lower levels of Rus' society) and enabled contacts between the East and West of that most important nature - commercial. Author shows how Mongol's definitely had influence on Rus' society - from culture, social interactions, institutions kept after Mongol's demise - but in the end all of this was short-lived. Rus' managed to keep their own identity, take and apply what they found useful, especially when it comes to contacts with their Asian neighbors (diplomatic protocols, approaches to inter-state relations) but still imported the Western architecture and cultural riches to create a unique blend that will identify the Rus' land from the days of rise of Muscowy and Rurikid dynasty in general to Russian Empire, Soviet Union and modern day Russia.
Always on border between West and East, and as far as I can see always more appreciated by East than West (for whom this area was always "the-wild"), it seems these lands had to build thick hide to be able to survive. So it is not surprising they managed to survive Golden Horde and eventually establish themselves as a force in the region.
Very interesting book on social interactions and how nothing can exist out of context. Nothing exists in vacuum and, short of genocide (which is rarely absolute), different people of different persuasions living near each other, will find ways to co-exist, intermingle and cooperate in public (although privately they might vow never to side with the "enemy" workarounds were constantly applied - i.e. by having spouses change religions, satisfying the conditions of social taboos) and most importantly engage in commerce.
Excellent book, highly recommended.
This is a very interesting and fantastic analysis of social interaction of two people, one sedentary and other nomadic, for period of about three hundred years. Period in which nomadic people, Mongol Golden Horde, through sheer terror and ruthlessness kept entire Asia and what is today European part of Russia and Ukraine (sedentary people) in political paralysis, always making them live on the edge of the knife and never knowing if Horde will decide to raze the land, cities and entire populations for any sign of resistance or disrespect to their rule, making sure they know that every open act of rebellion might be the last.
Thanks to the geographical location of Rus' lands, Golden Horde did not try to openly control it (as it did in Persia/Iran or China) because it was too much frontier land, but was collecting taxes and constantly engaging various nobility in internal conflict and war with external forces like Lithuania. In exchange, Rus' accepted the situation as is and decided to do something very interesting, something that one might find more when researching individual human behavior when put under unbearable pressure - they decided to negate Golden Horde dominance and just put them into same bucket with other steppe people that spread chaos in the area [but were definitely more short lived when compared to Golden Horde]. Since Golden Horde never took reins of control in Rus' land, this could be done with ease. Apparently, steppe warriors were common in those times that exerting blackmail of destruction and taxes on isolated cities was something that would not excite anyone. Basically Mongol's were collectively negated as a force that had any long lasting effect on the Rus'. For this to work people taking this approach need to be very patient and ready to accept hard times to reach their goal.
And to say this is something unique, it is not. Just note what happened to Nubian/Kushite empire - they were eradicated post-factum. Rus' did this real time for a sole reason that Golden Horde actually did not care what Rus' wrote in their records, as long as they got their money. In contrast, fall of Mongol's in eyes of Persians and Chinese and prestige of being associated with Golden Horde happened when Golden Horde ultimately disintegrated (which is more in line with Egyptian example) - here Mongol's actually controlled these areas and therefore after-the-fact expunge had to take place to keep local pride high.
Even being located on the borders of the huge Golden Horde empire, did not prevent Rus' to flourish in times between rebellions and uprisings and inter-city wars. Under the racket of Golden Horde, huge military force protecting the Silk Road and all means of trade between East and West [that brought huge wealth to the Horde], trade routes brought huge riches and prosperity (even to lower levels of Rus' society) and enabled contacts between the East and West of that most important nature - commercial. Author shows how Mongol's definitely had influence on Rus' society - from culture, social interactions, institutions kept after Mongol's demise - but in the end all of this was short-lived. Rus' managed to keep their own identity, take and apply what they found useful, especially when it comes to contacts with their Asian neighbors (diplomatic protocols, approaches to inter-state relations) but still imported the Western architecture and cultural riches to create a unique blend that will identify the Rus' land from the days of rise of Muscowy and Rurikid dynasty in general to Russian Empire, Soviet Union and modern day Russia.
Always on border between West and East, and as far as I can see always more appreciated by East than West (for whom this area was always "the-wild"), it seems these lands had to build thick hide to be able to survive. So it is not surprising they managed to survive Golden Horde and eventually establish themselves as a force in the region.
Very interesting book on social interactions and how nothing can exist out of context. Nothing exists in vacuum and, short of genocide (which is rarely absolute), different people of different persuasions living near each other, will find ways to co-exist, intermingle and cooperate in public (although privately they might vow never to side with the "enemy" workarounds were constantly applied - i.e. by having spouses change religions, satisfying the conditions of social taboos) and most importantly engage in commerce.
Excellent book, highly recommended.
August 9, 2025
4.25/5. I am certainly not an expert on medieval Russian or Tartar history, but I hazard to say that Halperin's monograph overall is convincing in its arguments and certainly doesn't come across as too dated. One of the most interesting ideas put forward to explain modern understandings of the Tartar Yoke being an "Ideology of Silence" utilized by the Russian chroniclers of 13th-15th century which allowed them to dance around the concept of their subjugation. Alongside the extant writings of these men, Halperin discusses geographic and economic reasons for the Golden Hordes relatively long lasting reign over Russia and contrasts them with those of other Mongol Khanates whose relationship with their conquered lands followed very different paths. Also of note, there are clear repudiations of popular narratives of Russia's development during and after this era that have been largely based on nationalist or Eurocentric revisionist ideology.
March 23, 2022
This is an excellent primer on the History of Russia. At this moment Putin is making claims about the historiography of Ukraine, and Kievan culture. It's worthwhile to find out what actually happened to form Russia.
Not all Putin's claims are without historical merit. However that doesn't give him the right to bomb Ukraine into rubble. In fact as the Kievan culture is the 'mother' of what was to become Muscovy and the Russian nation, it deserves respect, not bombs.
Not all Putin's claims are without historical merit. However that doesn't give him the right to bomb Ukraine into rubble. In fact as the Kievan culture is the 'mother' of what was to become Muscovy and the Russian nation, it deserves respect, not bombs.
June 28, 2022
This was my first time reading a scholarly text about Mongol or medieval Russian history so I was a bit overwhelmed at times, but overall the author does a good job presenting his ideas about how the Mongols and later the Golden Horde effected the history and development of the medieval Russian principalities and later helped facilitate the development of Muscovy as the dominant power and eventual unifier of all Russia.
December 8, 2024
I'm giving this 4 stars because of the information & perspective the author presented.
But 3 stars for readability.
If this is your first book on the subject, find something else. It's an incredibly dry read. That being said, the author's alternative approach to Russian/Tatar relations is really interesting and goes against what most historians have claimed. I would definitely recommend this book to someone who is already familiar with this subject.
But 3 stars for readability.
If this is your first book on the subject, find something else. It's an incredibly dry read. That being said, the author's alternative approach to Russian/Tatar relations is really interesting and goes against what most historians have claimed. I would definitely recommend this book to someone who is already familiar with this subject.
January 27, 2024
The first half was a slog of various names, people groups, and cities. If you're familiar with Russian history already, it might be simpler to understand. But as it was, all was thrown together with very little explanation or context. The second half (effects, ramifications, etc.) was significantly more interesting and better written. Still, it's a book I will probably never read again.
November 15, 2025
I think the main thesis of this was that the Russians basically refused to acknowledge their Mongol oppressors and admit that they’d been conquered. Also Russian peasants rarely interacted with mongols unlike aristocrats. This book didn’t rly tell me much abt how the conquest went down which was what I was interested in but oh well!
October 12, 2017
A thesis paper disguised as a book. If your really really into Russian history it's a good read if not, it's a thesis.
February 9, 2010
I grabbed this book from Quincy probably almost a decade ago. It was one of the texts of a Russian history class he was taking. It's been on my shelf since. I'm not sure why it suddenly looked appealing, but I started it. It's very dry. I'm sure the historical detail is fascinating to scholars in the field. Less so to me. Now that I've started something else, I'll probably never finish this.
January 30, 2013
Despite the overwhelming lack of historical recordings, Halperin manages to weave a concise and readable story of the Russians under the Tatar-Mongol Yoke. Halperin describes how he drew his conclusions as well as the reasons why it is so difficult today to understand the true impact of the Mongols on Russian history and development.
August 26, 2014
An easy read for a period of history with lots of names, dates, and battles, yet almost exceedingly so. The work is very short despite covering several centuries of history, and at times glosses over important concepts. A good intro for someone with no background on the Golden Horde's influence on medieval Russia, yet limited in further extended discussion.
February 8, 2012
This book was very dry, but still it was a fascinating look at Russia during the time of the Golden Horde. It not only explores this period, but it also explores the prejudice and biases of historians since that time.
August 11, 2011
Great info, very readable.
November 7, 2011
Halperin attempts to argue a thesis based on non-existent evidence and does a phenomenal job. An interesting twist to an old history.
October 20, 2015
Interesting but inconclusive history. That's mostly because Russian primary source documents were destroyed. Not an easy read.
November 29, 2015
Short, informative, to the point, with ample evidence and strong logic, this book filled in the gaps left by my Soviet education in my understanding of my own people's history.
April 28, 2011
Great info, very readable.
Displaying 1 - 24 of 24 reviews