Mongols in europe, how well will they fare in reality?

[frontier-auxilia]

Ok i know everyone here hated those what if and persudo v.s style threads but this is a question im really curious about. Let say if the mongol decided to actually plan a direct invasion into europe what will happen?

From what most people said the Germans and Italians will utterly butchers the mongol with their army full of professional heavy infantries/cavalry and mass crossbows in open battle. However theres a problem with these interpretations that formed from a few general assumptions, these are mainly.

1st: Every nation that Genghis Khan steam rolled posessed were filled with incompetent levies, scared to peasants and bascially no professional forces to meet the threat

2nd: The mongols have no capable generals after Subotai and Jebe. Now let say if the mongols are dedicated, they will send competent generals hell bent on conquest. Then theres also the record of the inability for Mongols to even besiege and take castles in west. True but when you look at the situation, with so few man in hand, who the hell would when a siege will be costly in manpower and time. Whereas sweeping through the countryside grant loots.

3rd: The inability for mongols to adapt to another form of warfare or plan. Or they can only fight as horse archers but nothing more. But they forgotten that the mongols actually can if the situation demanded it. This is most noticeable in the campaign undertaken by Kublai khan, where he reform his mongolian army into a full fledge naval force when the terrain in southern china was horrible for cavalry operation. Then theres also the assumption that the Mongol will go into europe empty headed with no idea what they will be facing. I don't see much truth in that owing to the mongol's excellent intelligent networks and also one (can be disprove) case where the venetians eagerly offered informations to them in exhange of economic monopoly around the western meditternean.

4th: The mongol sux0r against real knights. Nonsense, or taking into account that the mongols will engage the knights as light horsemen in battle without strategem.

Personally i think the most realistic is that the grass in western europe is not nutritrous enough for the mongol's horse and stretching the supply line (yes they still have one) way too far.

What say you guys?

[gaius valerius]

NOT THIS AGAIN!!!! WHYYYY.... (just look up this topic in search forums, we've had it ample times, don't have time to answer anyways at this point I'll likely just add what I've written before so many times...).

[Arto]

@ 1st

Are you basically dissing the Khwarezmids?

[frontier-auxilia]

@ 1st

Are you basically dissing the Khwarezmids?

No im just saying whether theres a discussion about mongols, people always think that what they face are simply push overs with incompetent armies.

Anyway what Galerius say is legit, the lack of pasture will be the key why the mongols will be unsucessful. I think one good precedent is the mongol invasion of India where the local geography posses severe tactical hinderance to their army.

[gaius valerius]

Or Korea, but there are differences. It was up until the Mughals to conquer the greater part of India and they switched tactics the deeper they went into the country. Korea was similarly difficult, but the trick there was internal strife in the royal/imperial house iirc (something completely absent in Europe - that is, a centralised unity). Also against Song they did not fare well but quickly adapted to naval combat in a few decades. Problem there though is that they could make use of present structures of Northern China.

A lack of pasture forms a severe problem for the Mongol troops.

[Babur]

Or Korea, but there are differences. It was up until the Mughals to conquer the greater part of India and they switched tactics the deeper they went into the country.

Not really, Timur dealt a crushing blow to the Delhi Sultanate,where many of his Mongol predecessors were unable to.

[gaius valerius]

Not really, Timur dealt a crushing blow to the Delhi Sultanate,where many of his Mongol predecessors were unable to.

Show that map with Timur's vast Indian empire... that was the point I was making... not that the Mongols couldn't do anything in India.

[Odovacar]

The mongols got as far as they could in real life.

[Romano-Dacis]

God, just play Medieval 2: Total War and find out...

[cottontail]

The Bosnian supergrenadiers would have stopped them.

[Old_Scratch]

I wouldn't be so quick to say that the Mongols would have been defeated in Europe. They decisively defeated an allied European army at the battle of Leignitz, 1241.

Also, they fought a variety of foes across Asia, the middle east, and Europe, not just peasant levies.

[Odovacar]

I wouldn't be so quick to say that the Mongols would have been defeated in Europe. They decisively defeated an allied European army at the battle of Leignitz, 1241.

More than one..two armies. A small clueless one, and a greater army which was in numerical inferority.
And left stone castles unconquered.

Nothing proves they could conquer Europe. And again, as I told people 100th times:
If someone can do something he does it.

[Old_Scratch]

More than one..two armies. A small clueless one, and a greater army which was in numerical inferority.
And left stone castles unconquered.

Nothing proves they could conquer Europe. And again, as I told people 100th times:
If someone can do something he does it.

I'm not trying to prove anything, I'm just saying don't be so quick to to dismiss the Mongol army as something that could only fight untrained peasants as the OP seems to be doing. We also have the battle of Mohi, another decisive victory against a European army.

The Mongols were systematic and organized in their conquests and had proved themselves very competent at siege-craft numerous times. I don't believe they would have had any more trouble with European fortifications than they had with the all the other fortifications that they crushed throughout Asia and the middle east.

There are a lot of reasons why the Mongols never went through with their invasion of Europe, but I don't believe the superiority of European armies or fortification was one of them.

[Entropy Judge]

Nothing proves they could conquer Europe. And again, as I told people 100th times:
If someone can do something he does it.

Addendum: He must also want to do it. Just because I *can* break my leg doesn't mean I'm going to. One (if not the) reason the Mongols stopped the invasion is that there was a change in rulers, after all.

[CtrlAltDe1337]

I don't think they could hold down that many subjugated people without them revolting after a while, or the Mongols becoming assimilated into European culture.

[kkaana]

In this forum you can never prove that an eastern army could win a victory against an western army. its impossible...

[Watchman]

Mongols trying to advance into Europe beyond the Great Hungarian plain would promptly run into a veritable s***storm of problems, you know.

One of the primary ones would be sheer logistics. The Hungarian pusta, essentially the Western terminus of the Great Eurasian Steppe Belt, never offered enough pasturage to maintain the kinds of animal herds steppe nomads and their tactics required; further into Europe even such meager pastures quite simply didn't exist. (They ran into similar problems in their repeatedly unsuccesful attempts at conquering the Indus valley.)

Another would have been the geography. Europe, quite simply, was somewhat cramped, full of thick trackless forests, mountain ranges and major rivers by the dozen. One reason European military traditions evolved a distinctive emphasis on a straight frontal clash was specifically this; it was a rare battlefield that didn't have its sides bounded by such geographical obstacles.
Combined with the aforementioned problems with feeding mounts, this would have very seriously crimped the maneuverability the Mongols so depended on, both tactically and strategically.

And then we come to the big one. Medieval Europe was absolutely rotten with fortresses; not just castles and fortified settlements, but vast webs of supporting satellite fortlets that pretty much inevitably were with nigh religious zeal built right where they could hamper the movements of any foe the most.
And these were proper stone fortifications, not the timber-and-earth affairs the Mongols' Chinese siege engines had pretty much walked over in Russia (where they were the first such machines to appear in centuries...).
And as it turned out, the Mongols had major problems dealing with the European fortress system. This had become evident already in their invasion of Hungary (where well-fortified sites were able to hold out), and Hungary was not even close to densely fortified by period standards. No fools, they learned their lesson and when the Mongols tried again in 1286 they not only butted their heads bloody on a whole new crop of fortresses but also got their asses handed to them on the field by the Hungarian royal army...

The Mongols were not, after all, the first steppe empire come make trouble for the "cape of a continent". The Avars had brought with them the trebuchet, and all comers had naturally enough done their best with the tried-and-true steppe tactics.
All had failed, too, the previous latest somewhat ironically having been the Hungarian-Magyars themselves, who are thought to also have been a part of the pressure that led to the creation of the Medieval European "defense in depth" fortification system (other contributors being the Vikings and the occasional Muslim raiding force in the south)...

[Babur]

Ok i know everyone here hated those what if and persudo v.s style threads but this is a question im really curious about. Let say if the mongol decided to actually plan a direct invasion into europe what will happen?

they would have won

From what most people said the Germans and Italians will utterly butchers the mongol with their army full of professional heavy infantries/cavalry and mass crossbows in open battle. However theres a problem with these interpretations that formed from a few general assumptions, these are mainly.

Germans were defeated at Liegnitz in 1241

1st: Every nation that Genghis Khan steam rolled posessed were filled with incompetent levies, scared to peasants and bascially no professional forces to meet the threat

so the Jin Dynasty,Kara Khitai,Khwarezmian empire did not have professional armies? .You know the Jin were able to drive Song dynasty south in the 12th Century.

2nd: The mongols have no capable generals after Subotai and Jebe. Now let say if the mongols are dedicated, they will send competent generals hell bent on conquest. Then theres also the record of the inability for Mongols to even besiege and take castles in west. True but when you look at the situation, with so few man in hand, who the hell would when a siege will be costly in manpower and time. Whereas sweeping through the countryside grant loots.

Of course they had competent generals look at how Hulagu steam rolled much of Western Asia in the 1250s on the orders of Mongke Khan.They succeeded in overcoming Song fortifications in China so why not in Europe? the Song were far more sophisticated than many European states at the time.

3rd: The inability for mongols to adapt to another form of warfare or plan. Or they can only fight as horse archers but nothing more. But they forgotten that the mongols actually can if the situation demanded it. This is most noticeable in the campaign undertaken by Kublai khan, where he reform his mongolian army into a full fledge naval force when the terrain in southern china was horrible for cavalry operation. Then theres also the assumption that the Mongol will go into europe empty headed with no idea what they will be facing. I don't see much truth in that owing to the mongol's excellent intelligent networks and also one (can be disprove) case where the venetians eagerly offered informations to them in exhange of economic monopoly around the western meditternean.

The Mongol army did evolve over time.In the Il Khanate,Golden Horde and Chaghatai Khan they became throughly Islamised over time.While in China, the Yuan Dynasty readily adopted new Chinese technologies such as the legendary "thundercrash bomb" which must be one of my favourite historical weapons .

4th: The mongol sux0r against real knights. Nonsense, or taking into account that the mongols will engage the knights as light horsemen in battle without strategem.

There were real knights at Liegnitz and Mohacs .

Personally i think the most realistic is that the grass in western europe is not nutritrous enough for the mongol's horse and stretching the supply line (yes they still have one) way too far.

That's silly, nomadic invaders such as the Huns,Avars and Magyars had ravaged much of Europe centuries before

What say you guys?

You don't read much history .

[Phunkracy]

they would have won

There's no way we can be sure of that.

Germans were defeated at Liegnitz in 1241

Silesian-German-Polish army, to be accurate. However, to some point allied Sil.-Ger.-Pol. army was succesful. The reason why alliance lost was total lack of knowledge about Mongol warfare and the swift movement of Mongol army, which prevented Silesians from gathering their forces.

so the Jin Dynasty,Kara Khitai,Khwarezmian empire did not have professional armies? .You know the Jin were able to drive Song dynasty south in the 12th Century.

However, Mameluk army was able to defeat Mongols.

Of course they had competent generals look at how Hulagu steam rolled much of Western Asia in the 1250s on the orders of Mongke Khan.They succeeded in overcoming Song fortifications in China so why not in Europe? the Song were far more sophisticated than many European states at the time.

True.

[Watchman]

On their return journey after Kalka River Subedei's army was also succesfully ambushed by the Volga Bulgars - by some accounts I've seen, when crossing a river, so in effect they had a Kalka done on them - although they were a while later able to beat the buggers in a straight field engagement.

Anyways, as mentioned, the Hungarians also sent them packing in 1286. So much for the Mongols' advantage over European armies, eh ?