Essential Histories 57: Genghis Kahn & the Mongol Conquests

Rating:
Summary: Not Turnbull's Best Effort
Review: Although I am a fan of Stephen Turnbull's earlier works on the Japanese Samurai and the Teutonic Knights, there is something basically wrong with his latest volume for Osprey's Essential Histories on the Mongols. First, Genghis Khan himself is only the discussed in about 10% of the volume and Turnbull certainly provides no fresh insights on this famed leader. Indeed, basic questions such as whether or not Genghis Khan should be considered as one of the great captains of history are never raised. Second, Turnbull bounces around chronologically too much; he is continually discussing one campaign, then reverting to discuss an earlier campaign in another area. Third, Turnbull focuses strictly on the military aspects of the Mongol Conquests (virtually ignoring the economic, social and political aspects), then actually tells us very little about the actual military aspects. Fourth, the actual period of Mongol conquests was in 1206-1294, not 1190-1400, and the bulk of the narrative actually focuses on a 60-year period. Finally, Turnbull's entire overly simplistic hypothesis is that the Mongol's success was due to their amazing ability to adapt to new circumstances and learn new military techniques. However, Turnbull concludes that the Mongol conquests ended because of their failures to adapt to the harsh theater of war in Southeast Asia and their gradual conversion from steppe nomads to urban dwellers. Huh? They won because they were adaptable, but they eventually lost because they adapted in the cities but not the jungles. A look at the barren bibliography, with only four non-Turnbull sources, clearly indicates a half-hearted effort on the author's part.

Genghis Khan & the Mongol Conquests 1190-1400 begins with a short introduction and chronology, followed by a brief section on the rise of the Mongols. The three-page section on the Mongols and their adversaries is totally inadequate, although Turnbull strives to make the point that the Mongol armies were not immune to logistical constraints. The outbreak of war section covers the Khwarazm campaign in 1219-1221and the Afghan War, but then this is followed by the fighting in China in 1211-1234, making this narrative difficult to follow chronologically. Turnbull's 44-page narrative on the main Mongols campaigns of 1211-1281 is the best part of the volume, particularly the campaigns in Korea/Japan and the Mideast. Portrait of a soldier showcases the Mongol general Subadai, but also includes more campaign detail. The section on how the war ended focuses on the jungle campaigns in Burma, Vietnam and Java where the Mongol advance finally petered out. There are eight maps supporting the narrative: the Mongol Empire 1190-1400; the conquest of the Khwarazm Empire; Mongol conquests in Korea and China; the Mongol invasion of Europe; the Battle of Mohi 1241; Mongol campaigns in the Mideast; the Mongol invasions of Japan; and the Mongol campaigns in Southeast Asia.

There are a number of interesting episodes in the long Mongol wars that Turnbull highlights, such as the five-year long siege of Xiangyang in China and the odd situation of Crusaders, Mamluks and Mongols facing each other in the Mideast in 1260. Turnbull is particularly adept in demonstrating how the steppe-born Mongols quickly learned siege warfare techniques and naval expeditionary warfare. Yet while Turnbull succeeds in praising Mongol tactical adaptability, he fails on the larger issues, such as explaining the Mongol drive for conquest. How did an obscure steppe people, never great in numbers, conquer the greatest land empire in history? Why were the Mongol enemies so unable to offer effective resistance - why couldn't they learn or adapt? Due to the operational-level focus of Turnbull's summary, this volume will not be useful for readers asking questions on the macro-level of geo-politics. Furthermore, the "adaptability" thesis presented for Mongol successes by Turnbull does not really answer the question of why this whirlwind phenomenon was able to arise out of nowhere and conquer the bulk of Eurasia in a lifetime. While the "adaptability" hypothesis is certainly better than the old "Mongol horde" claptrap, it probably only addresses the Mongol side of the equation (just as suggesting superior armored warfare doctrine explains German success in 1940, but it does not explain French collapse).

Rating:
Summary: Genghis Khan, huh.... Sure.............
Review: Genghis Khan & the Mongol Conquests is a book from a series called "Essential Histories." From what I have seen from this book, this series shows the essentially detailed and not the basics, which is often times much more useful. This book is titled Genghis Khan & the Mongol Conquests, yet there is barely anything at all of the great Khan's life. This is what the book says about Genghis Khan's childhood: "The nomad world he entered was a fierce and unforgiving one of rivalry and survival skills. Like all Mongol children, Temuchin learned to ride with great skill and to handle a bow and arrows." That's it. Any given internet site would give more information than that! In fact, for his life story, I often had to turn to web sites. The battles and campaigns were described in great detail. However, even with its immense wealth of knowledge about campaigns, I found the book unfulfilling. Half of the campaigns were Kublai Khan's, and whenever Genghis Khan's death was mentioned, it was no more than a paragraph. DO NOT BUY THIS BOOK IF YOU WANT A GENGHIS KHAN REFERENCE!!!

Rating:
Summary: Genghis Khan, huh.... Sure.............
Review: Genghis Khan & the Mongol Conquests is a book from a series called "Essential Histories." From what I have seen from this book, this series shows the essentially detailed and not the basics, which is often times much more useful. This book is titled Genghis Khan & the Mongol Conquests, yet there is barely anything at all of the great Khan's life. This is what the book says about Genghis Khan's childhood: "The nomad world he entered was a fierce and unforgiving one of rivalry and survival skills. Like all Mongol children, Temuchin learned to ride with great skill and to handle a bow and arrows." That's it. Any given internet site would give more information than that! In fact, for his life story, I often had to turn to web sites. The battles and campaigns were described in great detail. However, even with its immense wealth of knowledge about campaigns, I found the book unfulfilling. Half of the campaigns were Kublai Khan's, and whenever Genghis Khan's death was mentioned, it was no more than a paragraph. DO NOT BUY THIS BOOK IF YOU WANT A GENGHIS KHAN REFERENCE!!!

Rating:
Summary: Confusing and flawed
Review: I recently bought this new book about the mongols - Genghis Khan & the Mongol Conquests 1190-1400 by the medieval historian Stephen Turnbull. This new book from Osprey was a bit disappointing; Turnbull often tends to be very careless with facts (like he confuses Subotai Bah'adur with Sükhbataar from the 20th century!) and he writes about the mongols solely from the eyes of their eastern asian adversaries, like the japanese and koreans. He also focus on mongol defeats, and fails to explain why they were able to expand so fast. Turnbull is a reknown expert on samurai and medieval japanese armies, and he claims that the Samurais were superior to the mongols, which I don't believe in. So this book is full of examples of heroic feats by the mongols' adversaries, but is confusing when it comes to describing the mongol armies themselves. Nevetheless, it was interesting to read about the korean and southeastern campaigns of the mongols, of which not that much is written.

/DK M

Rating:
Summary: Confusing and flawed
Review: I recently bought this new book about the mongols - Genghis Khan & the Mongol Conquests 1190-1400 by the medieval historian Stephen Turnbull. This new book from Osprey was a bit disappointing; Turnbull often tends to be very careless with facts (like he confuses Subotai Bah'adur with Sükhbataar from the 20th century!) and he writes about the mongols solely from the eyes of their eastern asian adversaries, like the japanese and koreans. He also focus on mongol defeats, and fails to explain why they were able to expand so fast. Turnbull is a reknown expert on samurai and medieval japanese armies, and he claims that the Samurais were superior to the mongols, which I don't believe in. So this book is full of examples of heroic feats by the mongols' adversaries, but is confusing when it comes to describing the mongol armies themselves. Nevetheless, it was interesting to read about the korean and southeastern campaigns of the mongols, of which not that much is written.

/DK M