Welcome to the Deep Dive. We sift through stacks
of research, historical texts, all that stuff,
to give you the essential truths, the surprising
connections. And today we're tackling Genghis
Khan. A figure who's just immense. Yeah. So mythologized,
so impactful. You could argue he's maybe the
most transformative person in Eurasian history.
Definitely. Born to Mujin, of course, the founder,
the first great Khan of the Mongol Empire. And
if you're looking for someone whose legacy forces
you to hold... you know, contradictory ideas
at the same time. He's your guy. He is absolutely
your guy. Builder of the biggest continuous empire
ever, but also, well, the orchestrator of unbelievable
destruction. So our goal here, our mission for
you, is to get past that simple image, that sort
of barbarian warlord stereotype. Right. We want
to really dig into the sources, look at his chaotic
rise, that political genius that let an orphan
unite the entire step. And his campaigns stretching
from, well, the Pacific practically to the Caspian
Sea. Plus the legacy, the structures, the politics
he left behind. It's complex. It's enduring.
And right away we hit problems like basic stuff.
His name, his title, even when he was born. Yeah,
that uncertainty itself tells you something about
the challenge, doesn't it? It really does. OK,
let's start with that biographical quicksand,
his birth date. Most historians kind of settle
on 1162, right? Around 1162, yeah. But you see
1155, 1167 thrown around too. There's even a
suggestion from one historian, Rechnevsky, that
Temujin himself might not have known the exact
date. Which tells us, what about the records?
Well, two things, really. First, precise calendar
dates just weren't the top priority for nomadic
tribes back then. And second, a lot of the biographical
details we rely on, they were put together later,
sometimes much later. shape to fit, you know,
an official story. So that fluidity in dates,
it reflects that distance between the event and
the writing. And the names. It's like a linguistic
maze. Totally. His birth name, Temujin. You see
it spelled Temujin sometimes. The thinking is
it might come from a Tatar warrior his father
captured, or maybe from the root word Temur,
which means iron. Iron. Okay. And then the big
one, Genghis Khan. Ah, the title. That's a whole
puzzle in itself. You see it written Genghis,
Genghis, Genghis. Wow, the variation. Different
languages romanizing the sounds differently.
Mongolian, Chinese, Persian sources. They all
heard it slightly differently. There's even a
theory that Genghis, the G spelling we often
use, might actually stem from a misreading of
Persian texts by European scholars way later,
like in the 18th century. Huh. But the meaning
itself is where the ambition really shows. Exactly.
What did Genghis Khan actually mean? So what
are the best theories? A few contenders. One
early idea was maybe he was just avoiding the
standard title Gur Khan, which means like Khan
of the tribes. His rival Jamukha had already
claimed that one. So he just sidestepped it.
Made up his own brand. Kind of, yeah. Shrewd
political branding, like you said. Ditch the
old title, make a new, unique one. Purely about
standing out. But the theory that holds more
weight now links Genghis to the Turkic word Tenghis,
meaning ocean. Yeah, so if Genghis means oceanic,
or maybe just implies strength, the whole title,
Genghis Khan, could translate to something like
universal ruler. Wow. Implying his rule should
be boundless, like the ocean surrounding the
world. This wasn't just about being a local chief.
This was global ambition right there in the name.
Sets the stage perfectly. OK, let's use this
confusion, this uncertainty about names and dates
as our way into the sources themselves. Because
understanding him means understanding who wrote
about him and crucially, why. Right. For historians
trying to piece together Temüjin's life, it's
like assembling a mosaic from shattered pieces
found all over the place. You mentioned the languages.
Over a dozen. Mongolian, Chinese, Persian, Armenian,
Syriac, you name it. And they're all looking
at the Mongols through their own cultural lens,
often a hostile one, you know, different politics,
different religions. So where do we start? The
key Mongol source seems to be... The Secret History
of the Mongols. That's the one. It's gold, really,
precisely because it wasn't written as later
imperial propaganda. It's got the unflattering
details. What kind of details? Well, it's attributed
maybe to someone in the imperial bodyguard writing
not long after Genghis's death. And this anonymous
author was willing to be critical, to recount
stuff that was taboo. Okay. It tells us about
him killing his half -brother, better fratricide.
It mentions moments when he was indecisive as
a young leader. And crucially, it doesn't shy
away from the big politically toxic question
mark over the paternity of his oldest son, Jochi.
Ah, the legitimacy issue. Exactly. Details that
the official histories written later just scrubbed
out. Which brings us to those official versions.
Right. Like Rashid Al -Din's Jamie's Al -Tawarik.
The Compendium of Chronicles. Right. Rashid al
-Din was writing a few generations later under
Ilkhan Ghazan, who had converted to Islam. Yeah.
He had amazing access, privileged access, the
confidential Mongol sources like the Alton Deader,
the Golden Book, which is now lost. So he had
the inside scoop. He did. But because he was
writing an official imperial history, he had
a job to do, clean up the family story. Oh, so?
Well, take Jochi's legitimacy. Rashid Alden completely
eliminates any hint of doubt about his paternity.
Why? Because the whole legitimacy of the later
Khans, including his patron Ghazan, flowed partly
through Jochi's line. So that doubt had to go.
That's the kind of editing we constantly have
to watch out for. And then you have the outsiders
looking in. Totally different perspectives there.
Wildly different. You've got the Persian chronicler
Jizhani. He was an eyewitness to the sheer devastation
of the Mongol conquests in places like Khorasan.
So understandably hostile. Intensely hostile.
Yeah. And justified from his viewpoint. He basically
sees the Mongols as like agents of the apocalypse,
unprecedented destruction. But then there's another
Persian, Juvaini. Right. His contemporary Juvaini.
He also lived through it, but he ended up getting
a high position in the Mongol administration
in Persia, the Ilkhanate. So a different angle.
A very different angle. He's generally accurate
on events, but his interpretation is much more
sympathetic. He often frames Genghis Khan as
this necessary force of order, maybe even divinely
sanctioned, who had to sweep away corruption.
So read only Jujani. You get a monster. Read
only Juvaini, you get a pragmatic, if ruthless,
state builder. Exactly. You absolutely have to
read them together, triangulate, understand their
biases. Okay, let's dive into that early life.
The reality was far from imperial beginning.
Oh, absolutely. Born into the Borjigin clan.
His father, Yusugei, was a chieftain. His mother,
Heoyun. Well, Yusugei had abducted her from her
first husband. who was from the Merkit tribe.
This abduction itself follows a pattern of step
warfare, but it sets up future conflict. And
Temujin's name. We mentioned Iron, or the captive
Tatar. There's also that birth legend, right?
Clutching a blood clot. Yeah, the secret history
mentions that. Born clutching a clot of blood
in his fist, supposedly signifying he'd be a
great warrior. Classic foreshadowing, likely
added later. But the real turning point, the
catastrophe, was his father's death. Yasuga's
death. Temujin was only about eight, maybe nine
years old. His father was traveling, accepted
food from some Tatars, traditional hospitality,
but these were enemies. They poisoned him. And
that just shattered everything for the family.
Complete disaster. Politically, socially, Temujin
was way too young to take over leadership. So
the clan abandoned them. The powerful Tahirid
faction, technically related but rivals, saw
their chance. They just... Left Halunen and her
young children, took all the followers, the herds,
everything. Wow. They were cast out, plunged
into extreme poverty, reduced to this desperate
hunter -gatherer life on the steppe, forging
for roots, nuts, hunting marmots, fish, just
trying to survive. That level of deprivation.
It must have forged his character. Absolutely.
It's the crucible. And it's in this desperate
state that we see that first glimpse of his ruthlessness
emerge, involving his older half -brother, Better.
The conflict over food. Ostensibly, yeah. Disputes
over hunting spoils, like a fish or a bird. But
it was deeper than that. It was about who was
going to be the leader of this little family
unit, the heir to their father's, well, non -existent
legacy at that point. And the outcome. The sources,
especially the secret history, are clear. Temujin
and his younger full brother, Khazar, ambushed
Bedr and killed him. Shot him with arrows. Fratricide.
A huge taboo in steppe society. Breaking kin
loyalty. Massive taboo. Which is why the later
official chronicles just erase it. Pretend it
didn't happen. But the secret history doesn't
shy away. No. It even records Holun, his mother,
being furious, reprimanding Temüjin and Khazar
harshly for killing their own kin. It shows this
was controversial, traumatic, even within their
tiny, struggling family. What's amazing, though,
is that Better's younger full brother, Belgotai,
didn't hold a grudge, did he? That's the remarkable
part. Belgotai not only accepted it, he became
one of Temidgin's most loyal, high -ranking companions
throughout his life. It shows Temidgin had this,
I don't know, uncanny ability, even as a teenager,
to command loyalty, even from someone he deeply
wronged. He also started building bridges outwards,
pragmatic alliances. Crucial ones. He swore the
Endapak the Blood Brotherhood oath with Jamukha,
another young noble who became a major rival
later. reached out to his father's old ally.
Togrol, yeah. Khan of the powerful Karat tribe.
Togrol had been Yasuge's anda. Temujin sought
his protection, basically becoming his vassal,
reminding Togrol of these old ties. This was
vital for survival. Okay, so he's got a bit of
fragile structure now. A powerful protector,
a blood brother. And a wife. He married Berta
around age 15, fulfilling an arrangement his
father had made years earlier, but that stability
was immediately shattered. The Morkits return.
Exactly. Seeking revenge for Hulin's abduction
years before. They raided Temujin's camp, and
this time, they kidnapped his wife, Berta. So
history repeats itself. It does. Temujin had
to get her back. He went to Togrul, his protector,
and Jamukha, his anda. They agreed to help. Launched
a campaign, defeated the Merkits, rescued Bert.
As she gave birth very soon after being rescued
to Jochi. Very soon. And this is where those
source contrasts we talked about become critical
again. Temujin accepted Jochi, raised him as
his firstborn son. Politically, that was essential.
But the timing. The timing raised questions.
The secret history confirms that this uncertainty
about Jochi's paternity lingered. It haunted
Jochi his whole life. It became a major source
of tension, especially between Jochi and the
second son, Chagatai, who apparently brought
it up frequently, questioning Jochi's legitimacy.
Which threatened the whole succession plan down
the line. Absolutely. Rashid Uldin, writing later,
he had to smooth that over completely, make Jochi
unquestionably legitimate. But the original doubt,
recorded in the Secret History, reveals this
deep fault line that ran right through the Imperial
family, impacting the Empire's future long after
Genghis was gone. Okay, so Temujin gets Bertha
back, but the alliance with Jamukha, that close
bond described in the Secret History, sleeping
under one blanket, it doesn't last. No, it was
doomed, really. They camped together for about
a year and a half after rescuing Bertha, but
their ambitions clashed. Taimujin, crucially
advised by his mother Holun and wife Berta, started
building his own following. How was he attracting
people? What was his pitch? He was building a
reputation, not just as a warrior, but as a fair,
reliable, and generous leader. This contrasted
sharply with the often arbitrary, self -serving
nature of the traditional tribal aristocracy.
People were drawn to his charisma, his meritocratic
leanings, even early on. So a different kind
of leadership. An ideology, almost. You could
call it that. And this new ideology inevitably
clashed with the old ways, represented by Jamukha.
This led to their first major battle at Dalan
Baljut around 1187. And Teal's it. He lost. Pretty
soundly, actually. Later, Mongol chronicles,
the official ones, try to spin it, make it seem
like a draw or even a victory for Temujin. But
modern historians generally agree, based on reconciling
the sources, that Dalin Baljut was a definite
defeat, a significant setback for him. A setback
that might explain the next phase, the so -called
hidden years. Exactly. This defeat is likely
the key. There's a strong theory, gaining wide
acceptance, that after Dallin Baljoot, Demijian
essentially vanished from the Mongolian steppe
for several years, maybe close to a decade. Vanished
where? The theory is he spent those years in
North China, serving the Jurchen Jin dynasty.
Possibly as a subordinate, maybe even in some
kind of servitude, or as a border guard captain,
he likely disappears from Mongol records because
he was... While elsewhere. And why would the
Mongol sources like the secret history omit this?
National prestige. It's a huge historical irony.
Genghis Khan's greatest triumph later was overthrowing
the Jin Dynasty. Right. So to admit that their
great founder had once been a servant or a subordinate
of the very empire he destroyed. That would completely
undermine the narrative of inevitable Mongol
destiny and supremacy. It had to be suppressed.
But think about what that experience, if true,
would have given him. Oh, it's transformative.
If he spent years within the djinn system, he
got an education no other steppe nomad could
dream of. He saw firsthand how a large sedentary
agrarian state worked. Their bureaucracy, their
tax systems, their administration. And crucially,
their technology. Their technology, especially
siege warfare. engineering, things the nomads
were traditionally weak at. When he reemerged
on the steppe around 1196, he wasn't just a charismatic
tribal leader anymore. He understood statecraft.
He understood logistics. He probably also came
back with significant wealth or resources gained
during his service. So serving his future enemy
was basically his imperial apprenticeship. A
massive irony. A profound irony. And when he
returns, he starts putting this knowledge to
use. He begins systematically dismantling his
rivals. How does he rebuild his position? Around
1196, he gets a chance. He helps the djinn. his
former masters, perhaps attack their enemies,
the Tatars. He also helps his old protector,
Tugrul, reclaim his leadership of the Karai after
Tugrul had been temporarily ousted. Shifting
the balance. Completely. These actions elevate
Temujin. He's no longer just Tugrul's vassal.
He's now a powerful ally, maybe even a de facto
equal. And he's still drawing followers away
from Jamukha. What made Jamukha less appealing?
Jamukha's actions after his victory at Dalan
Baljut really hurt him. The sources record this
horrific act. He supposedly boiled 70 young male
captives alive in 70 cauldrons. Boiling prisoners.
Yeah. Whether it's literal or symbolic, it represents
extreme cruelty, even by step standards. This
kind of brutality alienated people. Important
figures like Munglig, whose family became incredibly
influential, defected from Jamukha to Temujin
around this time. They saw Temujin, despite his
own capacity for ruthlessness, as the more stable,
predictable, and ultimately more principled leader.
But Temujin wasn't exactly. gentle himself he
had his own moments of calculated cruelty absolutely
we need to be clear about that the secret history
always critical notes his actions against the
jerkin tribe who were related to him but disobedient
he executed their leaders and then there's the
incident where he had a leading jerkin noble
killed by having his back broken in a staged
wrestling match why wrestling why break his back
it was a public execution but breaking the back
was controversial Mongol custom usually dictated
that nobles should be executed without spilling
blood strangulation, for example. Breaking the
back was seen as degrading. It sent a message.
Temujin was willing to defy even established
customs to enforce absolute loyalty and submission.
He was playing by new rules. His rules. Okay,
so the stage is set for the final showdowns.
Rivals are weakening. Temujin is consolidating
power. Right. Around 1201, a coalition of tribes,
unhappy with Temujin's rise, got together and
elected Jamukha as their Gurkhan, that universal
ruler title. Temujin and Togrol, still allies
at this point, decisively defeated this coalition.
But that alliance between the two big players,
Temujin and Togrol, couldn't last. No. Too much
power concentrated. Togrol, apparently influenced
by his ambitious son Sengum, started seeing Temujin
as a threat. Paranoia set in. In 1203, they tried
to ambush Temujin. Did it work? Temujin was defeated
in the initial clash at a place called Kalakaljit
Sands, but he managed a skillful retreat, kept
his core forces intact, and this retreat led
to something significant. The Beljuna Covenant.
Exactly. This is a really key moment, ideologically.
Temujin and his small band of loyal followers,
only about 19 of them initially, maybe growing
to a few thousand later, reached the muddy lake
or river called Beljuna. They were exhausted,
starving, and there they swore this famous oath.
What was the oath? It was an oath of mutual loyalty,
but the crucial thing was who took it. It was
this incredibly diverse group. Muslims, Christians,
Buddhists, men from nine different tribes. They
weren't bound by blood or clan, only by their
personal loyalty to Temujin. He promised them,
if I achieve my great work, meaning unifying
the Mongols, I will share the sweet and the bitter
with you. Breaking the tribal mold completely.
Absolutely. This was the prototype for his later
empire. Loyalty to the leader above all else,
meritocracy in action. After Baljuna, they regrouped.
Temujin gathered more forces and then confronted
the Karait decisively at the Jejur Heights later
in 1203. And this time? This time, Temujin won,
crushed the Karait. Tigrul fled, but was killed
by some Naiman border guards who didn't recognize
him. Temujin then absorbed the Karait elite into
his own structure. Leaving only one major rival
standing. The Naimans. In 1204, Temujin met them
at the Battle of Shukurmout, another decisive
victory for Temujin. The Naiman leader was killed.
The steppe was now effectively his. What happened
to Jamukha, his old Andai, now his rival Gurkhan?
Jamukha's end is interesting. He was betrayed
by his own remaining followers who handed him
over to Temujin, probably hoping for a reward.
And Temujin rewarded them? Nope. He had them
executed immediately for their disloyalty to
their own master. Another clear message. Loyalty
is paramount, even loyalty to an enemy. And Jamuka
himself. The accounts differ. The secret history,
perhaps wanting to give the old blood brother
some dignity, says Temujin granted him an honorable
bloodless death, possibly strangulation, after
Jamuka requested it. Other sources suggest a
much harsher end, maybe dismemberment. Either
way, he was eliminated. So by 1206, the unification
was complete. The tribal warfare that had defined
the steppe for centuries was over. Timujin stood
alone. Exactly. Military victory was one thing,
but building a state that would last, that was
the next challenge. And the foundation for that
was laid at the Great Assembly, the Kurultai,
held in 1206. Where was it held? At the headwaters
of the Onan River, a significant place in Mongol
tradition. And it was there that Temüjin formally
adopted his new title, Genghis Khan. Universal
ruler. Right. But this cruel tie wasn't just
about a fancy title. It marked the beginning
of what historians call a social revolution.
Genghis Khan knew the old tribal system based
on kinship and clan loyalty was inherently unstable.
It bred feuds, fragmentation, rivals challenging
the leader. That had to change. He needed a new
basis for loyalty. Not blood, but the state.
Or rather, loyalty to him. Loyalty to him and
through him to the state and the imperial family.
He deliberately set out to replace those old
tribal affiliations with absolute, unconditional
loyalty to the Khan and the ruling lineage. How
did he restructure society to achieve that? He
created a new hierarchy. At the very top, the
Altan Yeruk, the Golden Family, that was himself,
his mother Hun, his brothers, his sons. They
were sacred, the ruling core. And below them.
Below them, the Koryasun, literally black bone.
This wasn't the old aristocracy, though some
were incorporated. It was a new elite composed
of loyal companions, successful generals, and
the heads of newly prominent families raised
up by Genghis himself. But the real engine of
this revolution was the military decimal system,
the Ming -Quan system. It seems to have gone
way beyond just organizing armies. Oh, it was
fundamental. It restructured the entire society.
Every able -bodied man, roughly between 15 and
70, was conscripted. They were organized into
units. Units of 10, Arben, 100 Jagun, and 1 ,000
Minkan. Standard military organization. Yes,
but here's the key twist. Each military Minkan,
the unit of 1 ,000 soldiers, was supported by
a corresponding Minkan of households, civilians.
Their lives, the economic output, were directly
tied to supporting that military unit. It essentially
created this massive state -controlled military
-industrial complex. Wow. And the most radical
part was how he dealt with defeated tribes within
the system. This was the masterstroke for stability.
When a tribe was defeated, say, the Tadars, the
Merkits, the Karait, the Naiman, their people
weren't just subjugated. They were systematically
broken up, dispersed, scattered across hundreds
of different minquads throughout the empire.
Commanded by? Commanded by officers personally
loyal only to Genghis Khan, often men he had
promoted based on merit, not tribal leaders.
So you could never again have, say, a Tatar uprising
because the Tatars were no longer together in
one place. Precisely. It completely eliminated
the possibility of old tribal identities reforming
and challenging the center. The Minkan system
atomized the old loyalties. And it worked. Even
when the empire eventually fractured centuries
later, the splits happened along the lines of
Genghis's descendants' territories, the Khanats,
not along the old pre -1206 tribal lines. That
foundation was incredibly strong. Descendants
of Genghis Khan ruled large parts of Eurasia,
largely unchallenged from within those old tribal
structures, right up into the 1700s. And underpinning
this was meritocracy, promoting based on skill
and loyalty, not just birth. This was revolutionary
first step society. He elevated his nokod, those
personal companions who'd stuck with him through
the hard times, the Baljuna guys. Many were from
very humble backgrounds. Like who? Well, his
top generals included men like Aishalme and the
legendary Subutai. They were supposedly sons
of a blacksmith. Mukwale, another top commander,
came from a slave lineage. You had a carpenter,
a shepherd, herdsmen who had warned him of danger.
These were the men appointed to the highest ranks,
commanding thousands. They owed everything to
Genghis Khan, not to some ancient clan privilege.
People like Borchu and Mukwale, early loyalists,
were given command of the right and left wings
of the army, huge honors and responsibilities.
And the absolute elite of this new meritocratic
system was his personal bodyguard, the Keshek.
Right. It wasn't just a bodyguard, though. It
was expanded dramatically from maybe 1 ,000 or
so to 10 ,000 men. The kishig was multifunctional.
It served as the Khan's personal household staff.
It was the military academy, where the sons of
commanders were trained and indoctrinated in
loyalty. And crucially, it became the central
administrative body for the entire empire. running
the government day to day. So service in the
Keshig was a huge deal. The highest honor. And
it had another function. Often the members of
the Keshig were the sons or younger brothers
of the regional commanders out in the field.
So they were elite troops, yes, but they were
also effectively political hostages, ensuring
the loyalty of their powerful relatives back
home. Very clever system. Okay, so military,
political, social structures are reorganized.
What about law? We hear about the great yasa.
The yasa or yasa. This was his attempt to create
a unified legal framework for this new state.
It wasn't necessarily a single book of laws like
a modern code. The actual text is lost and its
nature debated. It represented a set of decrees,
principles, and legal precedents established
by Genghis Khan. He appointed his adopted stepbrother
Shigi Kotukur, a captured Tatar raised by Hulalun,
as the chief judge to administer it. It covered
things like theft, adultery, treason, military
discipline, even environmental rules like forbidding
polluting water sources. Its main goal was to
enforce order, discipline, and above all, loyalty
to the Khan. So maybe not a codified book, but
a system of established judicial authority and
principles. Exactly. It provided a common legal
foundation for a very diverse empire, functioning
as a kind of constitution, establishing the rule
of law, at least in theory, under the Khan's
authority. Crucially, it was largely secular,
separate from any specific religion. So he's
got the military, the society, the law, but there's
still the spiritual dimension. He had a rival
there too, didn't he? The shaman Kokachu. Yes,
Kokachu, also known as Tebtengri, meaning most
heavenly or holy heavenly. He was the son of
Munglig, that influential early supporter we
mentioned. Kokachu gained immense influence as
a powerful shaman. Claiming to speak for Tengri,
the sky god. Directly. And people believed him.
He started using the spiritual authority to meddle
in politics, trying to create divisions within
the imperial family itself. He particularly targeted
Genghis's capable brother, Khazar, trying to
undermine him. A direct challenge to Genghis's
authority. A massive challenge. Genghis Khan,
again advised by the politically astute Berthe,
who saw the danger, couldn't tolerate a rival
center of power, especially a spiritual one.
He gave his youngest brother, Timur, the task
of dealing with Kokochu, arranged for Kokochu
to be accidentally killed. The story goes they
broke his back that method again during a supposed
wrestling match, then left him in a cart. By
eliminating the most powerful shaman, Genghis
Khan effectively usurped that position too. He
became the ultimate link between the Mongol people
and Tengri, the supreme deity. So by around 1207
-1210, he's consolidated everything. Military,
political, legal, and spiritual authority. The
state is built. The foundation is laid. And now,
with the homeland secured and unified, his gaze
inevitably turned outwards. Expansion was the
next logical step. And it started almost immediately.
His son Joshi led a campaign north in 1207 to
subjugate the forest tribes of Siberia. Why Siberia?
Resources. Control of the fur trade, grain supplies
from the south, and access to gold mines. It
secured the northern flank and brought valuable
assets into the new empire. The stage was set
for the much larger campaigns to come. First
major target. The Western Shia Kingdom, ruled
by the Tanguts. Raids started early, but the
big push was 1209. Right. The motives were mixed.
There was retaliation. The Shia had sheltered
some of his enemies, like Tukrul's son. But more
importantly, the Mongol economy needed resources
after the unification wars. Plunder was essential.
And strategic reasons, too. Securing the Silk
Road. Definitely. The Shia controlled a key section
of the trade routes. Subjugating them meant securing
that flank and gaining access to that wealth.
So in 1209, Genghis led a full -scale invasion
himself. And this is where they hit a wall. Literally.
Siege warfare. Yes, it was a real learning curve.
The Mongols were masters of mobile warfare on
the plains, but taking heavily fortified cities,
they just didn't have the experience or the specialized
equipment yet. Their siege techniques were initially
pretty basic, crude battering rams trying to
blockade cities. Which led to that famous blunder,
the Yellow River incident. Ah, yes. Near the
Shia capital, Zongxing, Genghis Khan had this
ambitious idea to like... Divert the Yellow River
to flood the city into submission. Bold plan.
Bold but flawed execution. The engineering wasn't
up to scratch. The dikes and channels they built
were inadequate. They broke. And instead of flooding
the city. They flooded their own camp. Exactly.
A major flood forcing a humiliating retreat.
An emperor flooding his own army. Not a great
look. A valuable lesson learned. A critical one.
He realized he needed expertise he didn't have.
He quickly made peace with the Western Xia. They
formally submitted paid tribute, even gave the
emperor's daughter Chaka as a wife to Genghis
in return for the Mongols' withdrawing. But the
lesson about needing siege technology stuck.
And that lesson would be applied very quickly
against the next much bigger target, the Jin
Dynasty in North China, starting in 1211. This
war felt different. It was more personal, more
driven by vengeance. Why vengeance? Genghis deeply
disliked the Jin emperor, Wanyin Yongji, who
had apparently treated him dismissively years
earlier when Temujin might have been in Jin service.
There is also the memory of Ambaghai Khan, an
earlier Mongol leader and relative of Genghis,
who had been betrayed and executed horribly by
the Jin decades before. That was a debt to be
paid. So revenge plus the obvious goal of massive
plunder. Massive plunder, yes. The Jin Empire
was huge and wealthy. The Mongols were heavily
outnumbered, maybe 8 to 1 on paper. But the Jin
state was internally weak, corrupt, and facing
rebellions. How did the invasion start? They
got a lucky break. The Ongud tribe, who guarded
a key part of the Great Wall for the Jin, were
ethnically related to the Mongols and decided
to switch sides, letting Genghis Khan's army
pour through the defenses. The Jin defenses just
crumbled. Pretty much. The Jin armies were large
but poorly led and lacked coordination. The Mongols
won several key field battles. However, the campaign
stalled briefly in 1212. Genghis himself was
wounded by an arrow while besieging the western
Jin capital, Shijing. He had to withdraw to recover.
Another setback in siege warfare. Was this the
final straw? This seems to have been the trigger
for that major strategic shift we talked about.
After this failure at Shijing, Genghis Khan formally
established a dedicated corps of siege engineers.
He actively recruited captured jinn experts,
hundreds of them. Carpenters, stonemasons, specialists
in siege engines like catapults and trebuchets.
So institutionalizing technological adaptation.
Right. Learning from the enemy. Exactly. Turning
the Mongol army from a pure cavalry force into
a combined arms military capable of taking down
the biggest cities. This change was absolutely
crucial for everything that came after. And it
paid off relatively quickly with the fall of
the main jinn camp. capital, Zongdu, modern Beijing.
Right. By 1214, the situation was dire for the
Jin. They signed a humiliating peace treaty,
giving massive tribute. But then the Jin emperor,
Xuanzong, made a fatal error. He moved his court
south from Zongdu to Kaifeng. Genghis saw that
as breaking the treaty. He interpreted it as
a sign of bad faith, an intention to regroup
and resist. So he renewed the war. His general,
Zhebi, used cunning tactics to take the strategic
Zhuyong Pass north of Zongdu. The city was besieged
again, and this time, with their new siege expertise,
the Mongols couldn't be stopped. Zongdu fell
in May 1215. In the sack. Brutal. Fires raged
for a month, according to some accounts. Massive
slaughter and looting. Genghis, however, didn't
stay. He left his top general, Mukhali, in charge
of mopping up the rest of North China, a task
that took years and turned his own attention
westward. Towards Central Asia. Which first meant
dealing with the Karaketai. Yes, the Karaketai
kingdom lay between Mongolia and the next big
power, the Khwarazmian Empire. It was ruled by
an usurper named Khushlug, a Naiman prince who
had fled from Genghis years earlier. Kuchlug
was unpopular, persecuting the local Muslim majority.
So an opportunity for the Mongols. A perfect
opportunity. Genghis sent his general Jebi the
arrow in 1218. Jebi didn't just invade. He used
smart propaganda. He proclaimed religious tolerance,
positioning the Mongols as liberators from the
oppressive Kuchlug. And it worked. Brilliantly,
the local population turned against Kuchleg,
who fled. He was eventually caught and executed,
his head paraded around. The Korak Kitai territory
was annexed swiftly, bringing the Mongol Empire
right up to the borders of the huge, wealthy,
but politically unstable Khwarazmian Empire.
And this leads directly to the incident that
triggered arguably the most destructive campaign
of all. The flashpoint. A huge Mongol trade caravan
arrived at the Khwarazmian border city of Otrar.
About 450 merchants, mostly Muslim, carrying
valuable goods. Crucially, members of the Mongol
elite, the Alten Yuruk, had invested heavily
in this caravan. So high stakes. Very high stakes.
But the governor of Otrar, a man named Inalchuk,
who was related to the Khwarazmian Shah's mother,
accused the merchants of being spies. He seized
the caravan and massacred almost everyone. Based
on... paranoia, possibly greed, possibly local
politics, whatever the reason, it was a catastrophic
mistake. How did Genghis react? Initially, he
tried diplomacy. He sent envoys, one Muslim,
two Mongols, to the Khwarazmian ruler, Shah Muhammad
II, demanding that Governor Inalchuk be handed
over for punishment. A reasonable request, arguably.
Maybe, but Shah Muhammad made his second catastrophic
mistake. Instead of negotiating, he did the unthinkable.
He killed the chief Muslim envoy and shaved off
the beards of the two Mongol companions, sending
them back humiliated. Killing an ambassador,
the ultimate insult. The ultimate provocation
in steppe culture and pretty much universally.
Violating diplomatic immunity like that was unforgivable.
It enraged Genghis Khan. Any thought of a peaceful
resolution was gone. This was now about vengeance,
about achi koryukwe evil for evil. So the invasion
of 1219 wasn't just conquest. It was punishment
on a grand scale. Absolutely. And Shah Mohammed
made yet another disastrous strategic error.
He ruled a vast empire, but it was politically
fragmented. His Turkic troops often unruly and
disloyal to him personally. Instead of concentrating
his forces to meet the Mongols in a decisive
battle, which might have been his only chance,
he dispersed his armies into large garrisons
in the major cities like Samarkand, Bukhara,
and Otrur itself. Playing into Mongol strengths.
Perfectly. It allowed the Mongols, with their
superior mobility and new... siege skills to
isolate and destroy the Khwarazmian army's piecemeal.
How did the campaign unfold? Swiftly and brutally.
Otrar fell first in 1220. Inalchip was reportedly
executed by having molten silver poured into
his eyes and ears. Genghis used brilliant maneuvers,
like leading a force personally across the supposedly
impassable Khazilkham desert to appear unexpectedly
before Bukhara, which surrendered quickly. Samarkand,
the capital, fell soon after. And Shah Muhammad?
He fled. He just ran westward, abandoning his
empire. Genghis dispatched his top generals,
Jeb and Subutai, with about 20 ,000 men, with
orders to hunt him down relentlessly. They chased
him across Persia. Did they catch him? No. Muhammad
eventually ended up on a small island in the
Caspian Sea, where he died miserably of pleurisy
or dysentery in the winter of 1220 -121. A pathetic
end for the ruler of such a vast empire. While
he was being chased, what was happening in the
core Khorasmian lands, like Khorasan. That's
where the real devastation occurred. Genghis
Khan's youngest son, Tolui, was given command
of the main Mongol army tasked with subjugating
the region of Khorasan, eastern Persia, and modern
Afghanistan. And he did it with terrifying efficiency
and brutality. Cities like Nishapur, Merv, Herak.
Three of the largest, wealthiest, most cultured
cities in the world at that time. They all resisted,
and they were all systematically annihilated.
Merv was supposedly subjected to a massacre lasting
days. Nishapur's destruction was legendary. Accounts
claim every living thing down to cats and dogs
was killed. Harat suffered a similar fate after
initially surrendering and then rebelling. The
death tolls recorded by contemporary historians
are just staggering. They are. Jujani and others
claim numbers like 1 .7 million killed at Nishapur,
2 .4 million at Herat, 1 .3 million at Merv.
That's over 5 million from just those three cities.
Are those numbers credible? Almost certainly
exaggerated. These chroniclers were writing to
emphasize the apocalyptic scale of the disaster.
But... Modern historians, trying to be more conservative,
still estimate the total death toll for the entire
Khwarazmian campaign across Central Asia could
easily have been around 1 .25 million people.
Even at that level, it represents a demographic
catastrophe on an almost unimaginable scale.
The intent wasn't just conquest. It was terror,
ensuring no future resistance. While Tolui was
devastating Khorasan, what about Djebi and Subutai
after the Shah died? Did they just go home? No,
this is where they embarked on what became known
as the Great Raid. It was an incredible feat
of arms, one of the greatest cavalry expeditions
in history. What did they do? For about four
years, from 1220 to 112, 1200, 224, their relatively
small force of maybe two tumens, 20 ,000 horsemen,
conducted this enormous reconnaissance in force.
They swung west, raided northern Persia, then
crossed the Caucasus Mountains, defeating the
Kingdom of Georgia. Into Europe. Into the lands
of the Russes. They entered the... the steps
north of the Black Sea, encountered the Kipchak
nomads, Cumans, and the principalities of Kievan
Rus'. In 1223, at the Battle of the Khalkha River,
they utterly crushed a combined army of Rus'
princes and Kipchaks. What was the purpose of
this great raid? It wasn't conquest, right? Not
permanent conquest, no. It was primarily reconnaissance
gathering intelligence about the lands, peoples,
and military capabilities of Eastern Europe.
It secured the western flank of the new Mongol
territories in Central Asia. And crucially, it
provided the strategic information that would
be vital for the massive Mongol invasions of
Russia and Europe that happened under Genghis's
successors, Urgaday and Batu, a decade or so
later. It was reconnaissance paving the way for
future conquest. Okay, so we've seen the conqueror,
the state builder. What about the man himself?
What was Genghis Khan actually like? Any reliable
descriptions? Frustratingly, no contemporary
confirmed eyewitness physical description survives.
The earliest descriptions come from chroniclers
writing decades later, like the Persian Dujani
or Rashid al -Din. They generally describe him
as tall, physically strong, robust, with a broad
forehead and chin, maybe reddish hair, and distinctive
cat's eyes, possibly meaning gray or green eyes.
But these are secondhand at best. What about
his character, his values? The sources must give
us clues there. They do. And one value stands
out above all others. Loyalty. That harsh upbringing.
The betrayals he suffered. It forged in him an
absolute premium on mutual fidelity. Loyalty
wasn't just a virtue. It was the bedrock of the
entire nation he built. And he rewarded that
loyalty. Generously. We mentioned the Baljuna
covenant promise sharing the sweet and bitter.
He followed through. He broke with Steppe's tradition
by dividing plunder more equally among his soldiers,
not just hoarding it for himself and the elite.
He even set up a system, recorded in the Secret
History, to provide for the widows and orphans
of his fallen nirkud, companions, ensuring they
received shares of cloth and food. It was about
creating a bond, buying loyalty, but also institutionalizing
mutual support. He also seems remarkably open
-minded for an absolute ruler. Adaptable. Very
much so. He apparently disliked excessive luxury
himself. Sources say he welcomed frank advice
and even criticism, which is rare for someone
with his power. He was intensely pragmatic. Like
adopting the Uyghur script. Exactly. He saw the
need for a written language for administration
and had the Uyghur script adapted for Mongolian.
He constantly sought out and employed specialists
from conquered peoples, Chinese administrators,
Muslim merchants and financiers, siege engineers
from Persia and China. He understood he didn't
know everything and actively sought knowledge,
especially about sophisticated technology and
governance, from the societies he overcame. But
this pragmatism was intertwined with a powerful
belief system, wasn't it? His sense of destiny.
That became increasingly central. He came to
genuinely believe that Tengri, the eternal blue
sky, the supreme deity of the Mongols, had personally
given him a divine mandate to conquer the entire
world. Imbued with Su. divine grace yes that
sue or divine fortune this belief was incredibly
powerful it justified everything anyone who opposed
him wasn't just opposing Genghis Khan they were
opposing the will of heaven itself this allowed
him to rationalize acts that might otherwise
seem hypocritical like killing his blood brother
Jamukha or launching devastating wars they were
necessary steps in fulfilling his divine destiny
And it fed into that principle of vengeance we
discussed. Good for good, evil for evil. It's
a principle of reciprocity. Show him loyalty,
like Boruchu or Jomi, and he rewards you beyond
measure. Show him defiance or treachery, like
the Khwarazmians or the Western Shia at the end,
and the vengeance would be absolute. Terrifying.
The destruction of the Khwarezmian Empire was
the ultimate example of Achi Koryolkwa on a state
level. Which brings us to his final campaign
starting in 1226. He turned back to the Western
Shia. Why? Unfinished business and perceived
disloyalty. The Western Shia had submitted back
in 1210, but they had refused to provide troops
for the Khwarezmian campaign in 1219. That was
seen as a major betrayal, a violation of their
vassal status. There might have been other provocations
involving his general, Mokwali, too. For Genghis,
this refusal was intolerable. It had to be punished.
And this campaign was different, more punitive.
It seemed so. It was almost a war of annihilation
from the start. Genghis ordered the cities along
the Gansu corridor to be taken and sacked one
by one. Resistance was met with massacre. Clemency
seems to have been granted much more rarely than
in some earlier campaigns. It was during this
campaign, specifically the long siege of the
sheik at capital Zongxing, that his health failed.
Yes. Sometime in late 1226 or early 1227, he
had a fall from his horse while hunting, which
seems to have aggravated an underlying illness
or caused internal injuries. He became increasingly
sick over the following months, running a high
fever. But he insisted the siege of Zongxing
continue. He died in August 1227 near the besieged
city. What did he actually die of? The accounts
vary wildly. They really do. The most straightforward
and likely explanation given the fall and subsequent
fever is probably complications from the injury
or perhaps an infectious disease common on campaign
malaria, typhus, maybe even plague. But the sources
offer more dramatic possibilities. Like Marco
Polo's version. Marco Polo, writing much later,
claimed he died from an infected arrow wound.
The papal envoy Carpini heard a story about him
being struck by lightning. And the most famous
lurid legend. That involves the captured Western
Shia queen or princess, Gerbelchen. The legend
claims she was forced into his bed, hit a dagger,
and castrated or fatally wounded him during the
encounter before possibly killing herself. It's
a dramatic story, popular in folklore, but historians
consider it highly unlikely. probably a later
invention reflecting the conquered people's desire
for revenge. Regardless of the cause, his death
was kept secret initially. A profound secret.
His inner circle concealed it from the army until
after Zongxing finally fell, which happened the
following month, September 1227. They didn't
want morale to collapse during the final stages
of the siege. And the treatment of Zongxing after
its fall. Reflecting Genghis's final orders,
apparently it was brutal, extreme savagery. The
Tangut population was systematically wiped out.
The historian John Mann calls it a very successful
ethnocide. The Western Shia kingdom effectively
ceased to exist as a distinct cultural entity.
His body was then taken back to Mongolia for
burial. Yes, transported in secret back to his
homeland. Buried, according to tradition, near
the sacred mountain Burkhan Khaldun, his birthplace.
The exact location was kept secret. guarded fiercely.
The area was declared Ich korrig the great taboo
forbidden to outsiders for centuries, adding
to the mystique. His death immediately raised
the critical issue. Right. Always a weak point
for nomadic empires. A huge problem. Traditional
Mongol custom often favored ultimogeniture, the
youngest son inheriting the home hearth, but
that didn't automatically apply to titles or
overall rule. Genghis knew this could tear his
empire apart, so he had actually addressed the
succession before his final campaign. And the
choice was between his four sons by his principal
wife, Berthe. Yes. Jochi the eldest, but there
was always that shadow over his legitimacy. Plus,
he seems to have become somewhat estranged from
his father, more focused on his own assigned
territory, Apanaj, in the west. Conveniently,
or perhaps not, Jochi actually died from an illness
a few months before Genghis did, so he was out
of the running anyway. Okay, so that leaves three.
Chagatai. Chagatai, the second son. Known for
being strict, knowledgeable about Mongol law,
Jasa. but also seen as harsh, uncompromising,
maybe arrogant, not necessarily the best temperament
to hold a diverse empire together through diplomacy.
Tolui, the youngest. Tolui was probably the most
capable military commander of the four company.
His campaign in Khorasan proved that. He was
popular with the army, but he was the youngest
and perhaps seen as too focused on military matters.
Also, his incredibly capable wife, Sorgatani
Beki, was an Astorian Christian, a patron of
many religions. Maybe some worried Tuluri wouldn't
preserve the core Mongol traditions as fiercely.
Which left Ugade, the third son. Ugade. He was
the one Genghis ultimately chose as his successor
before he died. Why Ugade? He wasn't the military
genius Tuluri was, nor the legal expert Chagatai
was. He was known to enjoy drinking, perhaps
too much. But he had the right temperament. He
was seen as generous, amiable, well -liked by
the commanders and his brothers. Crucially, he
was seen as someone who could compromise, listen
to advice, and trust the capable subordinates
his father had put in place. In a newly forged
empire held together by personal loyalty and
fragile institutions, those qualities were deemed
essential for stability. So after Genghis died,
Tolui acted as regent for a time. Yes. Tolui
served as regent for about two years, from 1227
to 1229. He managed the transition, established
precedents like halting military campaigns for
a mourning period. Then, in 1229, a choral tie
was held, and Ugaday was formally enthroned as
the second Great Khan, according to his father's
wishes. And we shouldn't forget the daughters.
Berthe had five daughters who also played key
roles. Absolutely. While the four sons' appanages
eventually evolved into the major successor,
Kanats, the Golden Horde, Jochi's line, the Chagatai
Kanate, the Ilkanat, Tolui's line in Persia,
and the Yuan Dynasty, Tolui's line via Kublai
in China, the daughters were vital political
instruments during Genghis's lifetime. They were
strategically married off to the leaders of important
allied tribes, like the Angjerat, Berti's own
tribe, the Akiras, the Angud. These marriage
alliances cemented loyalty and integrated key
groups into the imperial structure through blood
ties. Berti's children, sons and daughters, were
the cornerstones of the empire's continuation.
So, when we try to sum up Genghis Khan's legacy,
We keep coming back to that fundamental paradox,
the builder and the destroyer. You have to hold
both ideas at once. On the one hand, the sheer
scale of the death and destruction, the multi
-generational trauma inflicted on settled civilizations
across Eurasia, China, Persia, Central Asia,
the Russ's lands, it's undeniable and horrific.
But on the other hand, the achievements were
equally monumental. Absolutely. He took a collection
of warring nomadic tribes and forged them into
a unified nation. He founded the largest contiguous
land empire in human history. That alone is staggering.
And the consequences of that empire? The Pax
Mongolica. That's arguably his most significant
positive legacy. For roughly a century, the Mongol
Empire enforced peace and security across a vast
swath of Eurasia. This allowed for unprecedented
levels of trade and travel along the Silk Road.
Ideas, technologies, goods. Marco Polo's journey
is just the most famous example moved across
continents with a speed and safety unimaginable
before or for centuries after. Standardized weights,
measures, maybe even rudimentary passports. It
connected the world in a new way. He also left
behind that structure of governance, the legal
system, the administration. Even if the great
Yasso wasn't a single written code, he established
the principle of centralized judicial authority
under Shiggy Kotukwo. He created administrative
structures borrowed from conquered peoples that
provided a framework for his. successors to rule
vast, diverse populations. The idea of a state
governed by law, however imperfectly applied,
was a key legacy. But his greatest failing seems
directly tied to Mongol tradition itself, the
succession. That's the consensus, yeah. His inability,
or perhaps unwillingness, to break completely
with the tradition of dividing territory among
sons meant the empire was destined to fragment.
Granting huge appanages to Jochi, Chagatai, Ogedei,
and Tolui inevitably led to their descendants
prioritizing their own local interests over the
unity of the whole empire. Within a couple of
generations, those appanages became functionally
independent. Khanats. The Golden Horde, the Chagatai
Khanat, the Ilkhanat, the Yuan Dynasty. The dream
of a single unified world empire died with him
or soon after. How is he viewed today around
the world? Let's start with Mongolia itself.
In modern Mongolia, the view is overwhelmingly
positive. He's far more than just a historical
figure. Historically, he even became integrated
into religious practice, seen almost as a deity
in some folk traditions, connected genealogically
to Buddhist figures after the Mongols converted
to Tibetan Buddhism. And in secular terms. He
is the undisputed founding father of the nation.
Modern Mongolians tend to downplay the conquests
and brutality, often framing it as just how things
were done back then and focus intensely on his
positive legacy. Like what? His unification of
the tribes, ending internal warfare. His establishment
of a written language, law, and state structures.
His use of the Kurultai as a consultative assembly.
They see these as the foundations of Mongolian
statehood, even connecting them to modern democracy.
His image is everywhere on the currency, the
Togrog. The main international airport in Ulaanbaatar
is named Chinggis Khan International. And that
colossal equestrian statue at Sanjin Bulldog
is a major national symbol. He is Mongolia. Now
contrast that with the Muslim world. which bore
the brunt of the initial invasions. A much more
complex and often negative view, naturally. Initially,
as we saw with Dujani, the Mongols were seen
as a scourge, almost divine punishment, the harbingers
of Judgment Day. Non -Muslim rule over ancient
Islamic lands was unprecedented and traumatic.
Did that view ever change? Somewhat. Later, especially
after Mongol rulers in Persia, the Ilkhans, and
the Golden Horde converted to Islam, some Muslim
chroniclers began to reinterpret Genghis Khan.
Maybe he wasn't the Antichrist, but an instrument
of God's will sent to punish the corruption of
the previous Muslim rulers like the Quoram Shah.
But in modern times, particularly with Arab nationalism.
The perception often shifts back to overwhelmingly
negative. He's frequently portrayed as the accursed
enemy, the quintessential barbarian savage. His
invasions are seen as the beginning of a catastrophe
that culminated in his grandson Hulegu's sack
of Baghdad in 1258, considered a foundational
trauma for Arab and Islamic civilization. What
about Russia, the Tatar yoke? Extremely negative
historical memory there too. The centuries of
Golden Horde dominance are traditionally portrayed
as a period of oppression, destruction, and backwardness
that held Russia back from European development,
isolated it, and arguably contributed to later
autocratic tendencies. The word yoke itself tells
you the perspective. China is interesting. He
conquered them. But the view is different. Very
different. And it's shifted over time. His grandson,
Kublai Khan, founded the Yuan dynasty, which
ruled all of China. So under the Yuan, Genghis
was revered as the dynasty's founder. Later,
the Manchu Qing dynasty, also outsiders who conquered
China, deliberately positioned themselves as
heirs to the Mongol legacy to legitimize their
own rule. What about in the 20th century? Chinese
nationalists initially saw him, quite reasonably,
as a foreign conqueror, a symbol of national
humiliation. But in recent decades, especially
as the Chinese state emphasizes a multi -ethnic
narrative of national history that includes the
Yuan dynasty as fully Chinese, Genghis Khan has
been largely rehabilitated. He's often presented
quite positively now as a great Chinese historical
figure, a unifier. And finally, the West. Europe
only experienced the Mongols indirectly at first.
Western views have fluctuated wildly. In the
14th century, with increased contact via the
Pax Mongolica, some Europeans saw the Mongol
Khans, especially Publai, as potentially powerful
allies against Islam, sometimes even portraying
Genghis as a just and wise ruler. But by the
Enlightenment in the 18th century, he became
the archetype of the Oriental despot, tyrannical
and cruel. And now? Now, Western scholarship
generally aims for a more nuanced assessment.
acknowledging the immense brutality and destruction,
but also recognizing the political genius, the
administrative innovations, the creation of that
vast interconnected world, and the long -term
consequences, both positive and negative, trying
to see the whole picture. So this deep dive really
underscores that complexity. To understand Genghis
Khan... You can't just pick one narrative. You
absolutely can't. You have to hold the ruthless
conqueror who caused unimaginable suffering alongside
the visionary state builder who created structures
that lasted centuries and connected continents.
The sources themselves force you into that uncomfortable,
contradictory space. He was a product of incredible
hardship, valued loyalty fiercely, promoted commoners
based on merit. Yet he executed his own blood
brother, rationalized mass slaughter through
divine mandate, and built an empire fueled by
vengeance as much as vision. Pragmatism and belief
were fused in a really potent, often terrifying
way. It seems like everything comes back to that
social revolution of 1206, breaking the tribes,
demanding loyalty only to him and the state.
That reorganization, the Minkin system, was designed
for one purpose, stability through centralized
personal loyalty. Eliminate the old identities,
eliminate the old threats. Which leads us to
a final thought for you, the listener, to mull
over. Consider this. Was Genghis Khan's greatest
strength that policy of destroying tribal loyalties
to ensure absolute loyalty to the state and the
ruling family? of the empire's eventual weakness
after he was gone. By eradicating those older,
deeply rooted kinship structures that had provided
social cohesion, however fractious, did he leave
his vast empire entirely dependent on the personal
qualities, the diplomatic skills, the sheer force
of will of his immediate successors? Instead
of building on a unified national identity that
could survive weak leadership, did he create
a system that could only function under exceptional
rulers like himself, making fragmentation almost
inevitable once average human beings took charge?