Listen free for 30 days
Listen with offer
-
Tamerlane
- Conqueror of the Earth
- Narrated by: Charlton Griffin
- Length: 9 hrs and 19 mins
Failed to add items
Add to basket failed.
Add to wishlist failed.
Remove from wishlist failed.
Adding to library failed
Follow podcast failed
Unfollow podcast failed
99p for the first 3 months
Tamerlane
Buy Now for £18.99
No valid payment method on file.
We are sorry. We are not allowed to sell this product with the selected payment method
Listeners also enjoyed...
Summary
With consummate skill, Tamerlane cobbled together a kingdom from the tattered leftovers of various Mongol fiefdoms. He then enlarged that fiefdom into a large and menacing power in the center of Asia. But when the mighty Mongolian empire decided to crush out this upstart rival, it was too late.
Tamerlane not only defeats the Mongols, but goes on to vanquish the Persians, the Indians and the mighty Ottoman Turks in successive wars. It was one of the most astounding developments imaginable, doubly so because of its swiftness and decisiveness. And at the time of his death in 1405, Tamerlane was on his way to invade and subdue China with an army of 200,000.
Ruling from his fabulous capital of Samarkand, he was a fascinating, controversial, and contradictory tyrant. He was both a destroyer and a builder, a barbarian and a cultured gentleman. He was ostensibly Muslim, but was the scourge of Muslim states, who vilify him to this day. The Tatar empire at his death approached the dimensions of the earlier Khans of Mongolia, yet it melted away immediately after his passing.
In yet another superb historical work, Harold Lamb brings the mighty Tatar leader to vivid life and shows how this ruthless commander used his superior intellect and magnetic leadership to overcome one obstacle after another. Tamerlane was truly one of the most remarkable personalities ever to emerge from the steppes of Central Asia.
More from the same
What listeners say about Tamerlane
Average customer ratingsReviews - Please select the tabs below to change the source of reviews.
-
Overall3 out of 5 stars
-
Performance2 out of 5 stars
-
Story4 out of 5 stars
- Amazon Customer
- 04-01-19
Tamarlane
Narrator was awful. His strange accent was unnecessary
story was ok. Does not justice to this conqueror.
Something went wrong. Please try again in a few minutes.
You voted on this review!
You reported this review!
1 person found this helpful
-
Overall3 out of 5 stars
-
Performance2 out of 5 stars
-
Story5 out of 5 stars
- Buddy
- 06-09-22
heading is optional
Read too slowly. Books are exciting. Get the paper back book. Be excited now today.
Something went wrong. Please try again in a few minutes.
You voted on this review!
You reported this review!
-
Overall5 out of 5 stars
-
Performance5 out of 5 stars
-
Story5 out of 5 stars
- Staupe
- 06-01-21
Great narration
The narration was great and made the book more lively. Story in itself is off course very interesting, but the narration made all the difference. Real passion 10/10
Something went wrong. Please try again in a few minutes.
You voted on this review!
You reported this review!
-
Overall4 out of 5 stars
- Jason
- 19-08-10
tamerlane = OK
good book, easy to follow the history line.
Something went wrong. Please try again in a few minutes.
You voted on this review!
You reported this review!
-
Overall3 out of 5 stars
- Dave
- 27-03-12
Not an easy listen
I don't know a lot about Tamerlane - that is why I chose this book - so I can't comment on the scholarly content. However I found it very much bulked out with long evocative descriptions of bleak landscapes or dancing girls at some gathering, and after a while you start to crave something a bit more substantial. I guess the problem is we simply do not have that much information, so the author has to flesh it out with scene-setting, although I was more than disappointed that an entire expedition to India was covered merely from the perspective of the womenfolk left behind waiting the return of their men. If we have no details then just say so - don't turn it into an exercise in evocative prose.
Part of the problem may be the age of the book. I don't know when it was written but it was clearly some time ago from certain references. However another problem is the reader. I have heard several books read by this guy, and just can't face any more. He speaks with an extremely posh accent, and I don't just mean he speaks well rather than 'common'. Some of his choices in pronunciation are very odd and for all I know they fit well in academic Oxbridge circles, but they just annoy the average reader.
So, would I recommend this book? Not particularly, although it may well be a fine study of a little-known subject. The sheer quantity of pointless fluff, and the highly irritating manner of the reader, are enough to make me think I could have made better use of my time.
Something went wrong. Please try again in a few minutes.
You voted on this review!
You reported this review!
-
Overall1 out of 5 stars
-
Performance2 out of 5 stars
-
Story1 out of 5 stars
- Asghar Bukhari
- 03-11-19
Bias and poor history
When a historian doesn't even know that the subject he is talking of isn't called a "Mohammadan" but a Muslim, that he doesn't follow the "Church" but Islam, one can only wonder at how little he actually knows of the subject at all.
it's bias or ignorance leads to these errors but both are unacceptable. fawning European references and condescending Islamic ones leads to me believe it must have been written during colonialism where everyone was a slightly less than a European.
i can't say Google would have helped this particular historian if it was around back then. As the saying goes 'all is yellow to the jaundiced eye"
Something went wrong. Please try again in a few minutes.
You voted on this review!
You reported this review!
3 people found this helpful
-
Overall1 out of 5 stars
-
Performance3 out of 5 stars
-
Story1 out of 5 stars
- SenMizeri
- 06-07-23
Dishonest garbage
I love the history of the Steppe Nomads, from the huns to the Turks, so I'm used to reading about the destruction they've wrought upon the so called civilised.
Timur led one of the bloodiest periods of human history with his thirst to be rival, if not outdo, Genghis Khan. This book completely ignores his victims, even going so far as to say that it disregards all accounts from the victims of Timur and only considers the chronicles of one of Timurs supporters as reliable. Timur did great, but terrible things, and to ignore this, and even go so far as to justify mass slaughter in the case of Christians (they apparently deserved to be slaughtered for rebelling against his rule), is despicable.
That last part is the only time he goes into some depth about Timur's bloodiness, the rest of the time he skirts around it by only talking about the destruction of buildings, which he then says was fine because Timur built new buildings in their place... Completely forgetting the killing side of sacking a city. Again, and again, he forgets to mention the victims story. Timur is one of the most deadliest leaders in history, rivalling 20th century dictators like Stalin in total, and ourdoing them in percentages. To ignore such a thing, and call those who mention is as unenlightened is wrong.
He could've swapped his chapter about how he would've owned the Europeans if he tried to invade them (claiming that Medieval Europeans had no concept of strategy and tactics - one of his many lies), with the perspective of his victims. He spends more time insulting Europeans, who had little direct contact with him, then he does with those he murdered and raped. He goes so far to claim all but one Asian historians fawn over Timur, and it's only because of Europeans he has a bad rap (another lie, all his victims were Asian... He had plenty of Asian haters)...
If you are about accuracy and ethical behaviour, don't give this huckster your cash.
Something went wrong. Please try again in a few minutes.
You voted on this review!
You reported this review!