What do you think?
Rate this book
Genghis Khan: His Life and Legacy
Genghis Khan was the founder of the Mongol Empire, the largest continuous land empire ever. On his death in 1227, this extended from the Near East to the Yellow Sea, and was expanded by his successors to include what is now Iran, Iraq and southern Russia. By 1206, Genghis Khan had completed the unification by conquest of all the tribes of Mongolia, and was acclaimed as universal Khan. He then launched his assault on Northern China. Peking was captured in 1215, and the Chin were finally subjugated by Genghis's successors in 1234. This is the definitive biography.
313 pages, Paperback
First published December 1, 1978
6 people are currently reading
216 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 - 18 of 18 reviews
Read
February 3, 2018This is a translation of Ratchnevsky's 1978 book originally written in German. The oddity is that it was decided to edit the work, reducing it's length, writing some of the notes into the text and changing footnotes to endnotes . The end result is a choppy sea rather than plain sailing. Apparently this was done to increase its appeal to that mysterious yet much pursued beast the 'general reader' . Some books I've come across on the Mongols or Genghis (Chingis to others) Khan are very lightweight. Retellings of secondary literature with barely a single lonely translated primary source in the bibliography. But not this book. It is an uncompromising book, rich in detail, reflecting long study and through knowledge.
Reading the first chapter was like taking a cold shower leaving me gasping in the detail, the names and relationships. It is explicit about power, the variety of ways of life and peoples living on the steppe, the northern forest zone and around lakes and rivers beyond the borders of China and faiths practised in the region. Some tribes were Nestorian Christians , others Buddhists, all practised Shamanism, with Shaman from tribes uninfluenced by Christianity or Buddhism were regarded as the most powerful.
The states bordering the region inhabited by nomadic tribes were similarly divided which seems to have been an important element in the early successes of the Mongols. While their armies were then comparatively small and lacked infantry, or expertise in besieging cities, they were facing houses divided against themselves. Chin China was ruled by Jurchids, originally from the steppe, sufficiently sinicized to be alienated from their nomadic kin, but still alien to their Han Chinese subjects. Kara Kitai had an aggressively Buddhist ruler who was persecuting his Muslim subjects . The new state of the Khwarazmshah extended from Iraq to Afghanistan and up into Kazakhstan was divided both between the Khwarazmshah and his Turkic mother both of whom issued conflicting executive orders to their subjects, their settled and nomadic populations were hostile towards each other while the Khwarazmshah and the traditional aristocratic elites of the region regarded each other with suspicion.
The coalition of tribes willing and unwilling that over much of his lifetime Genghis Khan ruled,were themselves deeply divided, not just by culture as mentioned above, but also by long treasured blood feuds. For Ratchnevsky a key element of Genghis Khan’s success in creating a Mongol people (The achievements of Genghis Khan have disappeared, but their memory remains alive among the Mongolian people. The national consciousness of sharing a common destiny, never completely extinguished among the people despite the struggles which broke out on the steppe after the demise of the empire, has been revived in modern times. From the days of Genghis Khan onwards, Mongolia became Mongolian. The Mongols were, however, no longer the nation of the era of Genghis Khan (p213) ) who were largely unified behind him was through his careful breaking of tradition. He declared that all plunder belonging to him and that he would distribute this, fairly, between those who fought with him – traditionally plunder was monopolised by chiefs who would give a proportion of it to their Khan. Secondly he appointed men to command based on merit and loyal service to him, previously the rule had been that command positions went to those of aristocratic status. Since this meant that Genghis promoted people who had been simple herdsmen, or tied in bonds of dependence upon aristocrats he created a broad groundswell of people who were keen to support him against their established hereditary rulers. Finally this was entrenched by creating a new system of organisation that in many cases cut across old tribal lines and worked to both break
up old systems of loyalty and power as well as to create a new chain of command governed by those personally loyal to Genghis Khan.
Naturally this only succeeded because he was successful in wining plunder in the wars first against his rivals on the steppe, and then the regional great powers that bordered the steppe.
The basis of Ratchnevsky's book is critical engagement with the source material. The most important of these are the Secret History of the Mongols, possibly written early in the thirteenth century, in Ratchnevsky's view written from an aristocratic viewpoint and critical of Genghis Khan, however even in this work some topics he argues were taboo and not recorded and the work shows the influence of epic storytelling conventions , next are the court histories of Yuan China and Mongol Persia, but since these are official histories they tidy up the record, for example Genghis Khan doesn't lose battles in these accounts, he just wins and then unaccountably disappears into political inactivity for a while. In short his caution is wise but his inferences may be open to other interpretations.
The study is short and only covers the period of Genghis' life but ranges widely over the culture and society of Mongols. A downside is that much of the evidence deals with the period of time after the lifetime of Genghis Khan when in Ratchnevsky’s account Genghis Khan’s actions were causing a process of social change. This is hard to avoid in any medieval biography and gives scope for scholars to exercise their cleverness in nuanced readings of the available evidence. This book doesn’t engage critically with the secondary literature (with one exception and that only in general terms) and some interpretations are stated as fact over which the ink has flowed in print wars and sudden raiding articles in the academic journals. While in a sign of the book’s age it does address the debate between Chinese and Russian scholars as to whether the Mongols were ‘progressive’ in Marxist historical terms or not. Perhaps that debate was a proxy for debating their own sense of their own country’s statehood and their relative openness or lack thereof to outside influence, or more likely the continuation of the Sino-Soviet split by other means into all possible fields of disagreement and contention, in any case, as the joke goes, its probably still too early to tell.
As it happens what I do recommend to anyone curious about the medieval Mongols isn’t any of the secondary, modern literature, but the surviving medieval accounts of visitors to see the Great Khans such as Plano Carpini and William of Rubruck. These are full of details about the daily lives, superstitions (such as not washing and definitely not stepping on thresholds) and manners of the people often coloured by potted histories of the rise of Mongols.
Reading the first chapter was like taking a cold shower leaving me gasping in the detail, the names and relationships. It is explicit about power, the variety of ways of life and peoples living on the steppe, the northern forest zone and around lakes and rivers beyond the borders of China and faiths practised in the region. Some tribes were Nestorian Christians , others Buddhists, all practised Shamanism, with Shaman from tribes uninfluenced by Christianity or Buddhism were regarded as the most powerful.
The states bordering the region inhabited by nomadic tribes were similarly divided which seems to have been an important element in the early successes of the Mongols. While their armies were then comparatively small and lacked infantry, or expertise in besieging cities, they were facing houses divided against themselves. Chin China was ruled by Jurchids, originally from the steppe, sufficiently sinicized to be alienated from their nomadic kin, but still alien to their Han Chinese subjects. Kara Kitai had an aggressively Buddhist ruler who was persecuting his Muslim subjects . The new state of the Khwarazmshah extended from Iraq to Afghanistan and up into Kazakhstan was divided both between the Khwarazmshah and his Turkic mother both of whom issued conflicting executive orders to their subjects, their settled and nomadic populations were hostile towards each other while the Khwarazmshah and the traditional aristocratic elites of the region regarded each other with suspicion.
The coalition of tribes willing and unwilling that over much of his lifetime Genghis Khan ruled,were themselves deeply divided, not just by culture as mentioned above, but also by long treasured blood feuds. For Ratchnevsky a key element of Genghis Khan’s success in creating a Mongol people (The achievements of Genghis Khan have disappeared, but their memory remains alive among the Mongolian people. The national consciousness of sharing a common destiny, never completely extinguished among the people despite the struggles which broke out on the steppe after the demise of the empire, has been revived in modern times. From the days of Genghis Khan onwards, Mongolia became Mongolian. The Mongols were, however, no longer the nation of the era of Genghis Khan (p213) ) who were largely unified behind him was through his careful breaking of tradition. He declared that all plunder belonging to him and that he would distribute this, fairly, between those who fought with him – traditionally plunder was monopolised by chiefs who would give a proportion of it to their Khan. Secondly he appointed men to command based on merit and loyal service to him, previously the rule had been that command positions went to those of aristocratic status. Since this meant that Genghis promoted people who had been simple herdsmen, or tied in bonds of dependence upon aristocrats he created a broad groundswell of people who were keen to support him against their established hereditary rulers. Finally this was entrenched by creating a new system of organisation that in many cases cut across old tribal lines and worked to both break
up old systems of loyalty and power as well as to create a new chain of command governed by those personally loyal to Genghis Khan.
Naturally this only succeeded because he was successful in wining plunder in the wars first against his rivals on the steppe, and then the regional great powers that bordered the steppe.
The basis of Ratchnevsky's book is critical engagement with the source material. The most important of these are the Secret History of the Mongols, possibly written early in the thirteenth century, in Ratchnevsky's view written from an aristocratic viewpoint and critical of Genghis Khan, however even in this work some topics he argues were taboo and not recorded and the work shows the influence of epic storytelling conventions , next are the court histories of Yuan China and Mongol Persia, but since these are official histories they tidy up the record, for example Genghis Khan doesn't lose battles in these accounts, he just wins and then unaccountably disappears into political inactivity for a while. In short his caution is wise but his inferences may be open to other interpretations.
The study is short and only covers the period of Genghis' life but ranges widely over the culture and society of Mongols. A downside is that much of the evidence deals with the period of time after the lifetime of Genghis Khan when in Ratchnevsky’s account Genghis Khan’s actions were causing a process of social change. This is hard to avoid in any medieval biography and gives scope for scholars to exercise their cleverness in nuanced readings of the available evidence. This book doesn’t engage critically with the secondary literature (with one exception and that only in general terms) and some interpretations are stated as fact over which the ink has flowed in print wars and sudden raiding articles in the academic journals. While in a sign of the book’s age it does address the debate between Chinese and Russian scholars as to whether the Mongols were ‘progressive’ in Marxist historical terms or not. Perhaps that debate was a proxy for debating their own sense of their own country’s statehood and their relative openness or lack thereof to outside influence, or more likely the continuation of the Sino-Soviet split by other means into all possible fields of disagreement and contention, in any case, as the joke goes, its probably still too early to tell.
As it happens what I do recommend to anyone curious about the medieval Mongols isn’t any of the secondary, modern literature, but the surviving medieval accounts of visitors to see the Great Khans such as Plano Carpini and William of Rubruck. These are full of details about the daily lives, superstitions (such as not washing and definitely not stepping on thresholds) and manners of the people often coloured by potted histories of the rise of Mongols.
November 30, 2022
This book was an interesting and incredibly in-depth read. It focused on the life of Genghis Khan, what led to his enormous takeover, and how he accomplished this feat. It begins with the background of the tribes and groups of people that lived in his native land, such as the mongols and the forest-dwellers. It shows the political and military value of each of these groups in order to establish a prior knowledge of these peoples and how they were successfully taken down by Genghis Khan. This book was uncommonly in-depth, to the point of lack of comprehension, with references that I had no knowledge of. After figuring out who each person was, and the names of the texts he derived this from, I was able to more fully understand. Beyond this point, the book was incredibly interesting, depicting strategies of war that only a mastermind could comprehend. I would recommend this book to anyone who wants an excessively detailed depiction of Genghis Khan and his legacy.
February 27, 2015
I have severe issues with this book. It's the standard biography of Genghis/Chinggis Khan, and how I wish that wasn't so. On a positive note, it's stuffed full of information.
Its most egregious negative: have other people noticed this weird habit? Time and again he writes a paragraph, and at the end tacks on a sentence, 'which was because he was a power-mad tyrant'. And you go, eh? Where'd that come from? As a conclusion... there's nothing to suggest he was, in the paragraph. Or at least, the facts he gives in the paragraph can be interpreted in quite another way. It's like he thought, oops, I haven't mentioned lately, 'and he was a power-mad tyrant' - lest the gist of my paragraph be misunderstood.
Rave over. But if you want a cogent portrait of Genghis, do not come here: he doesn't attempt one. Other people attempt one, and you can argue with them, of course; 12th-13th century figures are hard to pin down. This author, however, is merely confused on what sort of person he thinks Genghis was.
The stars are for the info. It's still useful for wide quotation from the sources, though these can be indiscriminately put together. It in fact gathers an unusual amount of material, as if biographers these days think such material extraneous. It's less help, however, in judging or weighing this raw source material. Even the redactor into English once politely mentions that he contradicts himself, in a view expressed; the sources, written in different circumstances and to different purpose, are in frequent contradiction, and I don't think that they are adequately unconfused for us here, or indeed critiqued. Another negative is an inconsistency in how much attention he pays or doesn't to a campaign or other event.
In short, it's well outdated. Perhaps the up-to-date choice of biographies is by Michal Biran, a scholar in the thick of Mongol studies today, as Mongol studies undergo a sea-change: Chinggis Khan. Exactly the same can be said for Ruth W. Dunnell who also has a biography out: Chinggis Khan: World Conqueror
Its most egregious negative: have other people noticed this weird habit? Time and again he writes a paragraph, and at the end tacks on a sentence, 'which was because he was a power-mad tyrant'. And you go, eh? Where'd that come from? As a conclusion... there's nothing to suggest he was, in the paragraph. Or at least, the facts he gives in the paragraph can be interpreted in quite another way. It's like he thought, oops, I haven't mentioned lately, 'and he was a power-mad tyrant' - lest the gist of my paragraph be misunderstood.
Rave over. But if you want a cogent portrait of Genghis, do not come here: he doesn't attempt one. Other people attempt one, and you can argue with them, of course; 12th-13th century figures are hard to pin down. This author, however, is merely confused on what sort of person he thinks Genghis was.
The stars are for the info. It's still useful for wide quotation from the sources, though these can be indiscriminately put together. It in fact gathers an unusual amount of material, as if biographers these days think such material extraneous. It's less help, however, in judging or weighing this raw source material. Even the redactor into English once politely mentions that he contradicts himself, in a view expressed; the sources, written in different circumstances and to different purpose, are in frequent contradiction, and I don't think that they are adequately unconfused for us here, or indeed critiqued. Another negative is an inconsistency in how much attention he pays or doesn't to a campaign or other event.
In short, it's well outdated. Perhaps the up-to-date choice of biographies is by Michal Biran, a scholar in the thick of Mongol studies today, as Mongol studies undergo a sea-change: Chinggis Khan. Exactly the same can be said for Ruth W. Dunnell who also has a biography out: Chinggis Khan: World Conqueror
July 11, 2023
Best biography of Genghis Khan out there, complete and concrete, very useful information from the begining to the end. Not confusing, and only requiring very basic knowledge of the main names of the Mongol Empire and Genghis's early life, even those ones are explained in pages dedicated to Main Personalities. It is very little opinion based and totally faithful to the sources.
It addresses all the life of the world conqueror, every aspect, every campaign, almost a year by year follow-up from what it is possible to assemble from the sources.
In the final part of the book, there is a small-medium chapter dedicated to the aspects enacted by Genghis less mentioned in other books, like the administrative part of the empire, legislation, religious policies and Genghis's legacy, the latter using historians from both sides of the "battlefield" and a tiny but interesting opinion from the author.
Totally recommend this piece of work, it is so sophisticated, well researched and well worked that can either be used academically or by a regular reader.
R.i.p P.R
It addresses all the life of the world conqueror, every aspect, every campaign, almost a year by year follow-up from what it is possible to assemble from the sources.
In the final part of the book, there is a small-medium chapter dedicated to the aspects enacted by Genghis less mentioned in other books, like the administrative part of the empire, legislation, religious policies and Genghis's legacy, the latter using historians from both sides of the "battlefield" and a tiny but interesting opinion from the author.
Totally recommend this piece of work, it is so sophisticated, well researched and well worked that can either be used academically or by a regular reader.
R.i.p P.R
March 25, 2019
A good and very academic overview of Genghis Kahn.
April 22, 2020
Terrible book. One sad map. Lots of linguistic detail, but no broad historical perspective. Skip this.
October 20, 2025
Really interesting primer. The English translation was rather poor quality and would be quite jarring at times. Probably would have been better if I knew the next two hundred years of Mongol history…
February 5, 2017
A 2.5
July 28, 2008
This book was fairly dry and seemed to skip around and have some wholes but that seems to be due to the nature of the book.
It's dry because it's a history book. There are some wholes because it's from the 12th and 13th century and records are spotty from then and there is not general consensus for many events in Khan's life
That being said this was written very well and a narrative thread was drawn surprisingly well. I appreciate Ratchnevsky's explanations of where the major histories differ and his suggestion and supporting argument of where the truth actually lies.
I liked the layout of the book. After Ratchnevsky told the life story he goes into greater depth about personality and governing qualities of Khan.
All in all a great book about an exremely interesting leader but by nature of it's topic and conflicting sources it is still a cumbersome read.
It's dry because it's a history book. There are some wholes because it's from the 12th and 13th century and records are spotty from then and there is not general consensus for many events in Khan's life
That being said this was written very well and a narrative thread was drawn surprisingly well. I appreciate Ratchnevsky's explanations of where the major histories differ and his suggestion and supporting argument of where the truth actually lies.
I liked the layout of the book. After Ratchnevsky told the life story he goes into greater depth about personality and governing qualities of Khan.
All in all a great book about an exremely interesting leader but by nature of it's topic and conflicting sources it is still a cumbersome read.
September 18, 2014
I encountered this book as an assignment in a university level Chinese History course. Another reviewer pointed out that this is not a biography or a narrative; rather, it is an academic investigation of several primary sources into Genghis Khan's life and legacy.
Throughout, it assumes that you are already familiar with the broad strokes of Inner Asian history, and I felt like the assumption was there that the reader had already read and considered the Secret History of the Mongols and the writings of Rashid ad Din, none of which I had any experience with.
If you are like me, (that is, an undergraduate student with an interest in surveys of world history) then chapter 4, describing the man himself, has the greatest value and is also the one with the fewest analytic digressions
Throughout, it assumes that you are already familiar with the broad strokes of Inner Asian history, and I felt like the assumption was there that the reader had already read and considered the Secret History of the Mongols and the writings of Rashid ad Din, none of which I had any experience with.
If you are like me, (that is, an undergraduate student with an interest in surveys of world history) then chapter 4, describing the man himself, has the greatest value and is also the one with the fewest analytic digressions
July 3, 2010
This is not so much a story-driven book as it is an academic investigation. For much of Genghis's life, there are only a couple sources, and of course they often present conflicting information. In such cases, the author tells you what each of the sources says, then provides his conclusion. This approach slows the paces and disrupts the story, but to do otherwise when the facts are unclear and require analysis is to mislead the reader.
The book covers Genghis's entire life, plus a chapter about what happened after he died, and touches on all aspects of his character, neither condemning nor idolizing him. By the end of the book, I felt I had a solid, thorough understanding of him as a person.
The book covers Genghis's entire life, plus a chapter about what happened after he died, and touches on all aspects of his character, neither condemning nor idolizing him. By the end of the book, I felt I had a solid, thorough understanding of him as a person.
July 9, 2016
I read this intermittently for 2 years. It was difficult to keep track of the different names in the beginning since there were also few annunciations.
The story of Genghis Khan is pretty amazing. His rise from nothing to supreme power is brutal but his goal was not just self-interest, also union. He respected other religions, beliefs and cultures and when conquering used this to his and his peoples advantage. A bloody history led by a brilliant man.
The story of Genghis Khan is pretty amazing. His rise from nothing to supreme power is brutal but his goal was not just self-interest, also union. He respected other religions, beliefs and cultures and when conquering used this to his and his peoples advantage. A bloody history led by a brilliant man.
March 4, 2008
Confusing.
Dry.
I felt that the writer couldn't decide whether to write a historical or a drama.
There was some interesting parts.
Dry.
I felt that the writer couldn't decide whether to write a historical or a drama.
There was some interesting parts.
July 26, 2008
This is a unique perspective on the warlord. It is based on sources from Central Russia (Uigyr) rather than the Persian (Il-Khan) sources. Good for compare/contrast.
December 11, 2010
Pretty good book ; Thomas Haining brings Paul Ratchevsky's highly cited German 1978 book to a broader market. Dense (60 pages of endnotes!), but quite readable to any anyone interested in history.
October 12, 2011
Very interesting bio about Genghis Khan. Also a great book to read about the early Mongols.
December 18, 2015
Ratchnevsky shows mastery of the available sources. The translation is well-sized and well-paced.
Displaying 1 - 18 of 18 reviews