Template:Vital article

	Genghis Khan is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive.
Article milestones Date Process Result December 4, 2004 Featured article candidate Not promoted February 12, 2005 Featured article candidate Not promoted
Current status: Former featured article candidate

This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography: Military / Royalty and Nobility / Core C‑class This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. This article is supported by the military biography work group (assessed as Top-importance). This article is supported by WikiProject Royalty and Nobility (assessed as Top-importance). This article is listed on the project's core biographies page. Mongols C‑class Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mongols, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Mongol culture, history, language, and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MongolsWikipedia:WikiProject MongolsTemplate:WikiProject MongolsMongols articles C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Central Asia C‑class Top‑importance Genghis Khan is part of WikiProject Central Asia, a project to improve all Central Asia-related articles. This includes but is not limited to Afghanistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Mongolia, Tajikistan, Tibet, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Xinjiang and Central Asian portions of Iran, Pakistan and Russia, region-specific topics, and anything else related to Central Asia. If you would like to help improve this and other Central Asia-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.Central AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject Central AsiaTemplate:WikiProject Central AsiaCentral Asia articles C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. China C‑class Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject China, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of China related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChinaWikipedia:WikiProject ChinaTemplate:WikiProject ChinaChina-related articles C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Military history: Biography / Asian / Medieval C‑class This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles C This article has been rated as C-class on the project's quality scale. Associated task forces: /  Military biography task force Asian military history task force Medieval warfare task force (c. 500 – c. 1500) Middle Ages C‑class High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages articles C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Religion C‑class High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion articles C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Pritzker Military Library C‑class Low‑importance This article is related to the Pritzker Military Museum & Library WikiProject. Please copy assessments of the article from the most major WikiProject template to this one as needed.Pritzker Military LibraryWikipedia:GLAM/PritzkerTemplate:WikiProject Pritzker-GLAMPritzker Military Library-related articles C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale. Template:WP1.0

Moreover the Yasa forbade maruan that is spies but probably only if determined against the Mongols (also Councils of Wang Mang)

Maybe add the reference to "World Heroes" game saga (where another historical characters appear, with changed names too) in the video game apparitions? He appears as Jenghis Carn (or Julius Carn, region variations).

Genghis Khan's legacy in military strategy, by Douglas MacArthur:

"Were the accounts of all battles, save those of Genghis Khan, effaced from the pages of history ... the soldier would still possess a mine of untold wealth from which to extract nuggets of knowledge useful in molding an army for future use ...[his] successes are proof sufficient of his unerring instinct for the fundamental qualifications of an army. He devised an organization appropriate to conditions then existing; he raised the discipline and the morale of his troops to a level never known in any other army,... he spent every available period of peace to develop subordinate leaders and to produce perfection in training throughout the army, and, finally, he insisted upon speed in action, a speed which by comparison with other forces of his day, was almost unbelievable. Though he armed his men with the best equipment of offense and defense that the skill of Asia could produce, he refused to encumber them with loads that would immobilize his army. Over great distances his legions moved so rapidly and secretly as to astound his enemies and practically to paralyze their powers of resistance.... On the battlefield his troops maneuvered so swiftly and skillfully and struck with such devastating speed that times without number they defeated armies overwhelmingly superior to themselves in number... he clearly understood the unvarying necessities of war. It is these conceptions that the modern soldier seeks to separate frum the details of the Khan's technique, tactics, and organization. So winnowed from the chaff of medieval custom and of all other inconsequentials, they stand revealed as kernels of eternal truth, as applicable today in our efforts to produce an efficient army as they were when, seven centuries ago, the great Mongol applied them to the discomfiture and amazement of a terrified world."

Source: Christopher D. Bellamy, The Evolution of Modern Land Warfare (London: Routledge, 1990), p. 195.

TrynaMakeADollar, Hunan201p has a point in this edit summary. "The Vintage News" is not something that should be cited here. The Women in Mongol Iran book is excellent, but you cite "p. 168"--that should be "p. 168 n. 37", and that note is no simple evidence of the fact you want it to verify. The Frank McLynn book is a bit sensationalist; you don't cite a page number, but I assume you are referring to the page where a footnote 90 is supposed to verify. I can't see that note, but McLynn seems to take old sources at face value. Chinese Imperial Women does not at all look like an acceptable book for our purposes. That entire section needs a thorough revision; the "morganatic wives" are sourced to, essentially, a TV program. But the more important question here is whether that section should start the way you wanted it, and whether the sourcing is strong enough to make that (the concubines etc.) the main point of it (I believe it is not strong enough). Drmies (talk) 16:21, 6 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've taken care of it. I've added a very reliable source that totally supports the statement. -TrynaMakeADollar (talk) 19:37, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Er, no, you added the same source Drmies clearly informed you was insufficient (a note outside the text of de Bruno), as well as the same old Broadbridge reference which doesn't back your OR. Please, a reference that states your claim definitively and in a single area. -- Hunan201p (talk) 21:57, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't remember ever using the Broadridge book as a reference before, especially not with the pages annotated. Did you read the whole book? I purchased the e-book, the first part of the book talks about Genghis's wives and concubines, especially in the chapter named "Conquered Women". The Women in Mongol Iran book does back my statement but it does so in a note. If you read the note then you would see that it points the reader to two references (with annotated pages) that support the statement. Perhaps if I used those two references along with the Broadbridge book (which 100% supports my statement) then those references would be enough to add the very simple and obvious proposed statement? -TrynaMakeADollar (talk) 00:08, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• Tsakhiagiin Elbegdorj takes oath on 10 July 2013.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 01:49, 9 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Ogadai Khan.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:26, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The following is statement comprises a section of this article titled "physical appearance":

The closest depiction generally accepted by most historians is the portrait currently in the National Palace Museum in Taipei, Taiwan, which was drawn under the supervision of his grandson Khubilai during the Mongol Yuan dynasty and depicts Genghis Khan with typical Mongol features.[98]

The reference [98] is this broken link to www.britannica.com:

https://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/media/114991/Genghis-Khan-ink-and-colour-on-silk-in-the-National

Judging from the Wayback Machine archives, the last time this britannica.com page was active was March 7, 2015. The Wayback Machine archive of the page says nothing about "typical Mongol features", nor does it say anything similar to "most scholars think tbis portrait is accurate":

https://web.archive.org/web/20150307183620/https://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/media/114991/Genghis-Khan-ink-and-colour-on-silk-in-the-National

All available archives of this webpage from 2011-2015 give only the following description:

"Genghis Khan, ink and colour on silk; in the National Palace Museum, Taipei, Taiwan."

Using the search function at Britannica.com, I can find nothing on their website about Genghis Khan having "typical Mongol features". Nor could I find anything on that website about the National Palace Museum portrait being considered by scholars as an accurate portrayal of him. The closest thing I could find anywhere on the net to anyone thinking that the National Palace Museum portrait was accurate, was in this paper by Lkhagvasuren et al. (2016):

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5023095/

Although many regard the portrait at the National Palace Museum in Taipei, Taiwan, as the depiction most closely resembles Genghis Khan, all existing portraits, including this one, are essentially arbitrary interpretations of Genghis Khan’s appearance by historians living generations after Genghis Khan’s era

Furthermore:

"Although the factual nature of the statement is controversial, Persian historian Rashid-al-Din reported in his “Jami’s al-tawarikh” written at the start of the 14th century that most Borjigin ancestors of Genghis Khan were tall, long-bearded, red-haired, and bluish green-eyed, suggesting that the Genghis Khan’s male lineage had some Caucasoid-specific genetic features [44]. He also said that Genghis Khan looked just like his ancestors, but Kublai Khan, his grandson, did not inherit his ancestor’s red hair, implying that the addition of Mongoloid-specific alleles for determining hair color to the genetic makeup of Genghis Khan’s Borjigin clan was probably from the grandmother or mother of Kublai Khan, that is, the wife or daughter-in-law of Genghis Khan."

In the introduction to his award-winning book on Genghis Khan, Jack Weatherford wrote:^[1]

Despite the many images and pictures made of Genghis Khan in subsequent years, we have no portrait of him made within his lifetime. Unlike any other conqueror in history, Genghis Khan never allowed anyone to paint his portrait, sculpt his image, or engrave his name or likeness on a coin, and the only descriptions of him from contemporaries are more intriguing than informative. In the words of a modern Mongolian folk song about Genghis Khan, "we imagined your appearance but our minds were blank." Without portraits of Genghis Khan or any Mongol record, the world was left to imagine him as it wished. No one dared to paint his image until half a century after his death, and then each culture projected its particular image of him. The Chinese portrayed him as an avuncular elderly man with a wispy beard and empty eyes who looked more like a distracted Chinese sage than a fierce Mongol warrior. A persian miniaturist portrayed him as a Turkish sultan seated on a throne. The Europeans pictured him as the quitessential barbarian with a fierce visage and fixed cruel eyes, ugly in every detail.

Since the current "physical appearance" section is POV not supported by the broken reference link, or its archives, I've decided to re-write this section with more balance and multiple legitimate sources. - Hunan201p (talk) 04:15, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please look at my edits. I backed up them up realiable sources but I also included some general concensus information so that everyone get a better understanding of the misconceptions. Yes, I also avoided copyrights.

In the introduction to his award-winning book on Genghis Khan, Jack Weatherford wrote:^[2]

About that Jack Weatherford fella you mentioned, I just checked up on him and found his book. ^[3]

He claims that Kublai Khan ordered his painters to draw all the portraits of the Mongol emperors. But I'm not sure if he knew the painter was Chinese or Mongol.

According to Herbert Allen Giles, Eli Lancman and Mongolian Professor Urgunge Onon the painter who drew the portrait of Genghis Khan was court painter Qoorisun ( also known as Khorisun, Ho li ho sun). Urgune Onon was also responsible for the translation of The Secret History of the Mongols.

^{[4] [5]}

There are obviously no portrait of Genghis Khan during his lifetime but there are still portraits of him during the Yuan dynasty (1270-1368). How accurate was the painting of Genghis Khan remains the only question.

"Although the factual nature of the statement is controversial, Persian historian Rashid-al-Din reported in his “Jami’s al-tawarikh” written at the start of the 14th century that most Borjigin ancestors of Genghis Khan were tall, long-bearded, red-haired, and bluish green-eyed, suggesting that the Genghis Khan’s male lineage had some Caucasoid-specific genetic features [44]. He also said that Genghis Khan looked just like his ancestors, but Kublai Khan, his grandson, did not inherit his ancestor’s red hair, implying that the addition of Mongoloid-specific alleles for determining hair color to the genetic makeup of Genghis Khan’s Borjigin clan was probably from the grandmother or mother of Kublai Khan, that is, the wife or daughter-in-law of Genghis Khan."

The biggest problem with Rashid-al Din is that he was born in 1249 (and Gazan Khan was born in 1271) that mean he never existed during Genghis Khan lifetime. If Genghis Khan really did have red hair why wasn't this recorded in the The Secret History of the Mongols or by any other Mongolian emperors? In the Secret History of Mongols it only mentions that the ancestors of Mongol who is Alan Guo was impregnated by a ray of light. Rashid Al Din interpreted this as Alan Guo was impregnated by a genie (spirtual creature ) and as a result have blue eyes ?

The only thing that supports Rashid-al Din account is some Mongols (event today ) do in fact have red hair, green eyes. That portrait of Ogedei Khan also seems to have blue-gray eyes with brown-reddish hair.

For example look at this image of Mongols red haired-blue eyes(or with green) https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-177386c54b4650c6b346a77d245203f3

The closest thing I could find anywhere on the net to anyone thinking that the National Palace Museum portrait was accurate, was in this paper by Lkhagvasuren et al. (2016):

According to the genetic study you posted there's a chance his paternal was haplogroup R1b ( Can we include that in the physical appearance section? Although the study mostly emphasizes the R1b in Golden family were a result of Genghis Khan's female clan marrying male Onguds clan ). R1b would serve a good evidence for red hair genetics but that shouldn't be the only good evidence since Mongolians also have 10-15% Caucasian mtDNA ancestry such as mtDNA H, U

Assuming it's been proven that Genghis Khan was indeed green-blue eyes with red hair and had the western eurasian haplogroup R1b. We still have to ask these questions

Was Genghis Khan a ethnic Mongol ? Did he looked like a white european or some light colored Mongolian Asian ? If he was R1b, did he have Mongoloid mtDNA or Caucasoid mtDNA

According to that 2016 study you posted, the Golden family are all haplogroup R1b but physically Mongoloid in appearance but what about Genghis Khan? Was he a Mongoloid R1b guy or a Caucasoid R1b because the most important thing is his anthropological data. That study only states he may have had some Caucasoid genetic in his male lineage and that he looked just like his ancestor, but how do they even know what their ancestors looked like ? Did his ancestors looked like Mongoloid with some Caucasoid genetic ? Like a Kyrgyz or something ?

For example King Tut was red head and may have been haplogroup R1b, sharing same paternal lineages with western European but in no way he looks European but some middle eastern caucasoid

Problem to these questions would be all solved if someone finds the burial of Genghis Khan but I see no reason to remove the accounts of Rashid Al Din.

While there is no evidence that can prove the accounts of Rashid Al Din of Genghis Khan were correct. The existence of Mongols with fair skin, light eyes and hair have long been reported, a occasional number of Mongols, especially among the minority groups from Mongolia have been either recorded or reported display light coloured physical traits.

The Olot people, a Mongol-Oirat subgroup were reported as being fair skinned with blue eyes and light hair. ^[6] The Tuvans, a Turkic or Mongol-Turkic ethnic group were reported to have blonde hair or red hair ^[7]. While most Tuvans have black hair, some also have chestnut brown hair^[8] but ocassionally showing blue-green eyes with blonde and freckles.^[9]

According to a journal of Northern races, the Tungus and some Mongols are considered to be lighter colored with more hair color variation in comparison to the average ethnic Chinese people despite all of them belonging to the same racial type.^[10]

 TelephoneBaby (talk) 11:22, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This Xlibris source is self-published by a non-expert. A lot of the stuff you are posting here is not relevant and of undue weight. And of course Rashid never saw Genghis Khan, but he authored the Universal History withnthe assistance of Bolad and under the supervision of Ghazan Khan. So it's a credible historical document that was approved by the Borjigin elite at the time. - Hunan201p (talk) 21:30, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The inclusion of Herbert Giles' 1905 book, as well as Eli Lancman (1966), stating that the portrait of Genghis Khan was made by a Mongol named "Ho-li-ho-sun" is dubious. The National Palace Museum where the painting is held says that it is anonymous:

https://theme.npm.edu.tw/khan/article.aspx?sno=03009223&uid=03009127&lang=2

Jeanette Shambaugh and her husband David also peg this portrait as having an anonymous author. Peer reviewed source:

https://books.google.com/books?id=2-_-CgAAQBAJ&pg=PA30 - Hunan201p (talk) 22:14, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the description of Ogodei Khan's portrait, as well as the claim that it is unclear if it's accurate or not. Without a refrence this is just original research. Also, it is impossible for the section on Oirats and Tuvans, etc to have any relevance to Genghis Khan's appearance, and this can't be interpreted as anything but original research; undue weight and WP:SYNTH. A lot of these sources are also dubious and referenced dubiously, as many of their observations are not being made in a physical anthropological context, but as a kind of diarial note, with no relation to Genghis Khan. - Hunan201p (talk) 22:28, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The multiple references to Urgune Onon here are WP:UNDUE. From what I can tell, Urgune Onon is the only guy in the world, besides the self-published Xlibris reference by Lorenzo Currie, saying anything about a "Qoriqosun", and the reference uses Urgune Onon. This is a fringe theory of Onon's that is not backed up by anything, and isn't the stance of the National Palace Museum or of Jack Weatherford, or Jeanette and David Shambaugh. - Hunan201p (talk) 00:04, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

He used to cut off villagers ears and make a pile if you resist him 2607:FEA8:5960:262:9CC4:6E0D:8C55:B66 (talk) 18:17, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done. It's not clear what changes you want to make. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 19:06, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I wanted to inform you that there is seems to be misinterpretation of a reference linked to Rashid al-dins work. He did not state that Genghis had red hair (or blue eyes). Here is the direct quote from Rashid al-din:

“It so happened that two months prior to Mögä’s [the son of Kublai’s nurse] birth, Qubilai Qa’an [Kublai Khan] was born, and when Genghis Khan’s gaze fell upon him he said, “Our [Chinggis Khan’s] sons are all of a ruddy complexion, but this boy [Kublai] is swarthy, just like his maternal uncles. Tell Sorqaghtani Beki [Kublai’s mother] to give him to a good nurse to be brought up by.”” -Rashid al-Din/Thackston translation, 415.

“It chanced that he was born 2 months before Möge, and when Chingiz-Khan’s eye fell upon him he said: “all our children are of a ruddy complexion, but this child is swarthy like his maternal uncles. Tell Sorqoqtani Beki to give him to a good nurse to be reared.”” -Rashid al-Din/Boyle translation, 241.

Here the link to the reference:https://archive.org/details/Boyle1971RashidAlDin/page/n245

Ruddy skin means reddish skin not hair. And nowhere are blue eyes mentioned. Can someone please correct this misinterpretation. Thank you.38.121.43.37 (talk) 14:20, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nice try, but banned sockmasters don't get to make edit requests, and nowhere in your quotes is the word "skin" mentioned. "Complexion" refers to anything, and just because blue eyes aren't in your quotes doesn't mean they aren't in the Compendium of Chronicles.

The reference used for the statement about Genghis Khan is a peer-reviewed study in a prestigious journal. However, there are of course tons of other references mentioning the red hair of Genghis Khan. Here's one:

"But Dai Sechen was content. He was now not just quda to Temujin – a potential fatherin-law – but the real thing, with a good-looking, red-haired son in law" - Frank McClynn, Genghis Khan, His Conquests, His Empires, His Legacy. pp.43

https://books.google.com/books?id=jcQzCgAAQBAJ&pg=PA43 Hunan201p (talk) 16:33, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The archive.org links posted above are not even translations of the Compendium of Chronicles. - Hunan201p (talk) 16:56, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hunan201p sourced Rashid-al-Din but is from Lkhagvasuren (2016), the study is full of assumptions rather than accuracy

May I ask where are the quotes for Persian historian Rashid-al-Din reported in his “Jami’s al-tawarikh” written at the start of the 14th century?

There's real life physical description of Genghis Khan According to biographer Paul Rachtnevsky https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=SQWW7QgUH4gC&pg=PA433&dq=Zhao+Hong+genghis+khan+Paul+Ratchnevsky+tall+long+beard&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiDi_Ge_dDoAhVRQEEAHYlvCQ8Q6AEIJzAA#v=onepage&q=Zhao Hong genghis khan Paul Ratchnevsky tall long beard&f=false}}

The Chinese, Zhao Hong, writes: “The ruler of the Tatars [sic], Temuchin, is of tall and majestic stature, his brow is broad and his beard is long. His courage and strength are extraordinary. :

" Juzjani comments that, according to the evidence of witnesses who saw him during the fighting Khorasan of witness who saw him during the fighting in Khorasan [in northwest Persia, in 1220, when he was in his late fifties] Genghis Khan was distinguished by his height, his powerful build, strong constition, his lack of grey hair and his cat's eyes. "