Abstract
This paper explains that Genghis Khan was the most successful individual ruler and military leader in all of world history even exceeding Napoleon Bonaparte and Alexander of Macedonia. The author points out that, in present day Mongolia and Eastern Asia, Genghis is regarded as a hero, who stands as a symbol of integration and as the father of a more modern social organization; and Khubilai's portraits still decorate the walls of modern Chinese temples and palaces. The paper stresses that the Mongols were killing machines on a scale that has probably never been matched in world history; however, they are also historical catalysts, who established pan-ethnic identities that have survived into modern times and who introduced notions of social mobility and open trade.

From the Paper
"Essentially, since the title of Great Khan was never agreed upon by all of the kurultai for Guyuk Khan between 1241 and 1248, it opened the door for his cousin, Mongke, to take the title upon his death. However, Mongke Khan provided his brother, Khubilai, with the military resources to carve out his own empire in China through is battles with the Song Dynasty. As his power grew, Mongke became increasingly suspicious of his brother and named their youngest brother as his successor; the kurultai backed this decision. However, the damage was done. "

Tags:military, ruler, integration, pan-ethnic, killers

Abstract
This paper is a historical comparison paper that discusses the lives, both military and political ,of Alexander the Great and Genghis Khan. It tries to prove which of the two leaders is greater.

From the Paper
"As time marches on, so do people, as they gradually fade into history. Eventually even civilizations collapse; fall to the wayside brought down by poor leadership, conquest, or a lack of progression. When thinking of civilizations and societies that stand the test of time, and that are models to be built upon, history always looks toward the larger civilizations. When large civilizations are talked about they are defined normally, by their expansion and conquests, rich cultural centers, as well as their educational and scientific excellence. This is why civilizations like the Chinese dynasties, the Greeks, the Romans, the Egyptians, and even the British are thought of as great civilizations. Each brought innovations to the world, each was the cultural center of its time (excluding the Chinese because they were so separate from the rest of the world), and each had its share of expansion. On a smaller scale, and not unimportant, are civilizations like the Mongols, the Macedonians, the Muslims, and some of the barbarian tribes in Europe. These smaller groups have less importance in an educational, or scientific sense (excluding the Muslims), but many of them had a great impact on history and changed many civilizations directly or indirectly. The Germanic barbarian tribes, for instance, were a contributing force in the demise of the Roman Empire. These smaller societies rely heavily on dynamic leadership for their success, and strive only through the greatness of individuals. While this same sentiment can be echoed for larger and more sustained civilizations, it is the ability to overcome incompetent leadership that grants longevity to a civilization. For the purposes of this paper the Macedonians and Mongols are to be considered, as small civilizations that flourished, and then fade away. The main historical significance within these civilizations, or nation states was their leadership, their expansion, their innovations and their creation of greater empires."

Tags:macedonia, mongol, warfare

Abstract
This paper examines how Genghis Khan was the greatest military conqueror of all time, in as much as he single-handedly conquered more land, by the mile, than any other leader before or after him. It looks at how his warlike ways were so brutal that they took on literally mythical proportions, seeding racial and social fear across Europe. It shows how, for his own soldiers and for the lands under his control, he was a beloved leader, religiously inspiring, and religiously tolerant, a dedicated soldier, and brilliant tactician, while to his enemies, he was genocidally murderous and a cruel and even inhumane warrior.

Outline
The Medieval Blitzkrieg
Destruction and Reconstruction
Terror Tactics
Conclusion

From the Paper
"The calvary which Khan employed was relatively unique for the time, enabled by the traditionally nomadic horse-based lives previously led by the Mongol people. "All members of the Mongol army were mounted, and the cavalrymen led spare horses that carried sufficient supplies and equipment needed for protracted campaigns". (Fisher, 2003) In the Khan's army, heavy calvary consisted of those wearing silk and leather armor and armed with lances and swords -- this contrasted with the truly heavy calvary of contemporary Europe, which was weighed down by literally hundreds of pounds of heavy plate and chain mail armor. The light calvary was protected only by thick leather helmets, and armed with bows. His army was about evenly divided between these forces, and both moved with exceptional speed compared to the very heavy calvary and the ubiquitous infantry of their opponents."

Tags:genocide, army, calvary, europe, terror

Abstract
This paper is a discussion of Alexander the Great and Genghis Khan as the greatest rulers of all time, arguing that Alexander the Great was the greater ruler. It compares and contrasts the empires of both. The armies and military strategies of the two are also discussed.

From the Paper
"Both men developed large empires and although Genghis' empire was larger, Alexander's proved to be more influential to civilizations and empires to come. Alexander had inherited his throne from his father Philip of Macedonia in 356BC at the age of 20. He continued in his father's campaign to rid Greece of the Persians, but he did not stop there. In the span of four years he had conquered all of Persia. By the time of his death, his empire spanned from the Adriatic Sea to India. His main objective was to create a common cultural exchange throughout the world. Due to the extensive trade routes in highly populated areas of that time, he was able to achieve his goal. He succeeded in establishing Greek as the universal language and was able to pass the Greek culture to other countries."

Tags:genghis, khan

Abstract
This paper explains that the Mongolian empire, which began about 1200 A.D., was selected as the best empire because its influential ideas and developments, horsemanship, militancy, nomadic lifestyle, leadership system, its fall and impact, make up all of the components needed to fully understand and appreciate the history of a great empire. The author points out that, in Khan's military system, which was derived from the philosophy of Alexander the Great, Khan's army integrated the commanders, bureaucrats, artisans, and professionals of the conquered peoples in order to produce new tastes in art, food, decoration, and clothing. The paper relates that the tremendous length of the Mongols' trade routes was directly related to their huge territorial domination and led, not only to the unification of the East and the West geographically, but also to cultural unification

From the Paper
"Under the rule of Genghis Khan, the Mongols started to dominate the world. He claimed power by saying that he was the "universal ruler." He basically used the Mandate of Heaven system of China, implying that he attained his power from God and he would be the ruler of the whole universe. This claim of Khan simply gives a clue on how he set up his ideology of ruling his state, eventually his empire. It seems like Khan's role model was Alexander the Great and his Greek Empire. Though the Greeks did not have a militaristic social structure, they had the idea of focusing on the expansion of the territory followed by more trades and getting wealthier. This was the system Khan set up as well. He was perhaps one of the greatest military innovators in human history, and his army consisted of perhaps the best-trained horsemen in all of human history. Khan's armies were incredibly mobile and could cover immense distances with numbing speed. Thus, it is clear that Khan established one of the major rules in rising of an empire: The tremendous military strength."

Tags:genghis, khan, unification, integration, trade

Abstract
Analysis of the Mongols conquest of China. Traits and strategies of Mongol rulers from Genghis Khan on including organization, military tactics, long-range planning, preservation of some of the structure of Chinese society, patience, persistence and brutality. Genghis as a military genius. Mongol impact on China. Rule of Kublai Khan.

From the Paper
"A number of factors made it possible for the Mongols to conquer China when such conquest had eluded earlier nomadic groups. Some of the same qualities which led to the Mongol conquest also led to the Mongol reign over China for nearly a century. Unlike earlier nomads, the Mongols were not only brutal, they were tenacious. Beginning with Genghis Khan and moving down through two generations of offspring and successors, the Mongols were incredibly patient and persistent. The image of "Mongol hordes" sweeping through towns and plundering and pillaging and moving onto the next town, drunken on horseback, could not be further from the truth, at least on the strategic level. While the Mongols did engage in brutality, as mentioned, the Mongol leaders, from Genghis Khan on, showed a proclivity for meticulous and long-range planning for the conquest. Once they had achieved ..."

Abstract
This paper explains that the period from 1200 to 1600 AD was one of the most stimulating and yet cruelest eras in American, European, Asian, African and Middle Eastern history. As the history of the world during these centuries is analyzed, the author underscores that, without the fall of the Roman Empire, the reported shifts in control, economic strength and ideology, contemporary society would be different. The paper relates the influences of personalities, such as Genghis Khan, Kublai Khan, Tamerlane and Christopher Columbus.

Table of Contents:
Introduction
Europe
Asia, China, the Middle East and the Mongol Empire
Ming Dynasty and Kublai Khan
Tamerlane and the Financial Collapse of China
Africa and Its Connection to the "New World"
America
Conclusion

From the Paper
"The Byzantine Empire sustained an advanced cultural, political, and economic system. Orthodox Christianity characterized the Byzantine Empire; however, simultaneously, a different type of Christianity was emerging that was not yet formally establishment. The foundations of Catholicism were developing in Central and Western Europe. Even though the diminutive kingdoms of Western Europe were diffused in the early Middle Ages, the territories known as the fiefdoms of Western Europe shared common ground: Latin as a language, Franco, a mixture of languages used to communicate by people who had different native languages, and the feudal society of the Catholic Church."

Tags:religion, trade, slaves, yuan, indians

Abstract
This paper reviews the "The Mongols in World History" website. It details the site's pros and cons.

Tags:Mongols, Genghis Khan, Chinggis Khan, Khubilai Khan, Kubla Khan, Marco Polo, China, World history

Abstract
China has been governed twice by a foreign group. The first was that of the Mongols, in the thirteenth century. The second was that of the Manchus, in the seventeenth century. This paper explains the reasons why the Mongols were only able to govern for a relatively short period of time, during which they caused an incredible amount of discontent among the Chinese, and why the Manchus managed to be much more successful in controlling China until the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. The paper examines events preceding the Mongol and Manchu conquests, as well as the ways by which the invaders were able to establish sovereignty. The important aspects of the Mongol and Manchu administrations are also examined, with an emphasis on the differences in those administrations, which provides reasons for Mongol failure and Manchu success. Finally, the demise of both dynasties is examined.

From the Paper
"The Mongols originated in the northern steppe, the land of which was not very accommodating for sedentary agriculture. Consequently, the Mongols were a nomadic people, specialists in animal husbandry and horse riding. From a very young age the males and females learned to ride on horseback and shoot arrows, creating a highly skilled fighting force. The Mongols organized themselves into tribes, which on occasion united under one khan. The Mongols considered their free lifestyle superior to that of the stationary farmers to the south. The Han Chinese in contrast relied on agriculture to fund the economy. The literati, a group made up of learned men who spent their days philosophizing and painting in the countryside, were revered. Due to an established examination system, the society was relatively mobile, allowing men from low ranking families to work as high government officials. The Chinese felt themselves above the barbarian nomads to the north. This great disparity between the two cultures is the greatest cause of the inability of the Mongols to control China effectively."

Tags:china dynasty mongol manchu agrarian emperor conquered westerner's empire, great wall, ming suicide heaven japan asian porcelain, genghis khan, han sovereignty

Abstract
The Mongolians were a nomadic, Eastern people driven into violence by necessity. Thanks to expert leadership and tactics, they formed the largest land empire in history. This paper illustrates the expansion of the Mongol Empire from 1200 to about 1400 AD. It gives descriptive accounts of crucial events and Mongolian leaders during the Empire's period of exponential growth and development.

From the Paper
"As much as the Mongols benefited from their newly obtained lands in China, they still sought more. Genghis now wanted more goods for his expanded nation, including weapons. In 1218, he sent a Mongol caravan west to the Kwarazmian Empire in Persia to help negotiate trade. In spite of the Mongols' innocuous intentions, the Kwarazmians unexpectedly accused the Mongolians of being spies and murdered the chief of the caravan. The rest were sent back to Mongolia with burnt beards, which caused them unendurable humiliation."

Tags:Genghis, khan, Kwarazmia, Persia