The Mongols could have conquered Europe?

[Verbose]

nb. - I don't think the mongols had any shot of conquering Europe; but that's due to logistics and, well... lack of any reason to do so. But, mano a mano, if we warp the armies of mongols and europeans on some other dimension battlefield, I think the mongols would have thoroughly wipe the floor with the europeans.

Well, usually, perhaps?

One tends to get this sense of the Mongol armies having rather better consistency than contemporary European ones, and a higher "lowest point of capability", or whatever one might call it. (That might be a false impression as well?) Otoh the thing about European armies of the time would seem relatively low levels of standardisation. Makes comparison difficult again. But, well, they probably would win under most circumstances in 1:1 set piece battles in the field. Which of course circles back to hit us on the back of the head in the sense that field battles settled next to nothing in European warfare of the period. Sieges otoh...

 

[SnowlyWhite]

that's why I've said they lacked any reason; in order to conquer Europe, they'd need a ton of sieges. Which were anything but a productive business.

otherwise, I don't know - if you consider a lot of sieges(and really, Europe could provide one on daily basis for tens of years), I agree it was unwinnable. On the other hand, if you manage to get enough "dread"(since we're on a game forum afterall ) after you massacre the population of the 1st cities you sack... maybe there'd be enough willing to surrender. But that's pure speculation; I don't have a clue...

 

[Veles]

Rare footage of the true relations between the Russian state and pesky kings of the steppe.

From 11:20 to 18:00

Link to video.

 

[plarq]

Northern China/Persia are better forward bases than Russia.

 

[Princeps]

I fail to see any genuine logistical problem that the Mongols might have encountered, assuming a unified Empire. They could have moved an army from the east, recruited various other tribes along the way and organized them into an invasion force. A military force like this could have easily pushed all the way into France, perhaps not at Blitzkrieg speeds (they would have needed to destroy the agricultural population along their path and wait for pastures to grow before proceeding), but at speeds that would have been unbelievable to Europeans nonetheless.

Logistics is a problem for a sedentary force, not for a pastoral nomadic force that is composed of people who live on the edge of human endurance their whole existence as a people. Unlike the sedenatries, who could not move their cities or farms on a notice, The Mongols could bring their yurts anywhere, and so likewise they could move their very center of economic material support along with them to Ukraine, thus there would be no long logistics chain running from China into Europe.

The Rus would have posed no threat to a unified Mongol force. The combined forces of all the Rus princes were vanquished by a Mongol scout force.

 

[ParkCungHee]

Logistics is a problem for a sedentary force, not for a pastoral nomadic force that is composed of people who live on the edge of human endurance their whole existence as a people. Unlike the sedenatries, who could not move their cities or farms on a notice, The Mongols could bring their yurts anywhere, and so likewise they could move their very center of economic material support along with them to Ukraine, thus there would be no long logistics chain running from China into Europe

No, nomadic and semi-nomadic forces still face tremendous logistical issues, they just do not face the same kinds of logistical problems, because they require their supplies to be there when they arrive. That means any invasion force is going to have to be almost continuously in contact with sources of food, water, and especially significant for the Mongols, fodder.
This requires a nearly unbroken string of victories because anytime looting is not occurring, your troops do not have access to supplies. This makes extended warfare and above all sieges extremely difficult to enact.
Clashes between sedentary and mobile people was not unheard of in the late middle ages, and while sedentary peoples did not always triumph, mobile people almost never achieved successful offensive political conquests.

 

[Domen]

Interesting article about the Golden Horde's siege of Caffa in 1346:

http://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/8/9/01-0536_article.htm

Why are the Mongols filing into Northern Italy? How are they moving their armies, siege engines, and camp followers around in what should be much more difficult terrain from the steppes and the Hungarian plain?

Mongols did not transport siege engines in one piece with them. This would terribly slow down their movement speed.

They either constructed siege engines before a particular campaign, but then dismantled all of them and transported them on horsebacks (each horse transporting several parts of - let's say - a catapult, or a siege tower); or constructed siege engines already after arriving at the gates of some town or castle.

So they either assembled (from parts of previously dismantled) or constructed siege engines before each siege.

Pretty similar tactics to that used by Crusaders in the Holy Lands - who often constructed siege engines using wood from their ships.

Jerusalem in the 1st crusade, for example, was captured thanks to 3 siege towers constructed from Venetian ships.

Regarding camp followers - Mongol camp followers also moved on horseback, so they didn't slow down army movements.

 

[History_Buff]

Yeah, I'm well aware of that. The point stands; moving an army with siege engines and camp followers, even if on horseback, is quite a bit more difficult to do in the Alps than it is on the Hungarian plane.

While Mongolian armies certainly were capable of doing such a thing when necessary, my question is why would they do so in this case, and how they would find forage for the vast number of horses they'd need for such an affair.

 

[Silurian]

It would be more logical to carry only the key elements of siege weapons with your army and use local timber to complete them.

 

[caketastydelish]

I doubt the mongols could have conquered Europe. I mean mean if they could have, they probably would have.

 

[Traitorfish]

Not that I disagree- I don't know nearly enough about the topic to judge- but what's your reasoning for that?

 

[ELITEOFWARMAN8]

In theory yes, but in realty I doubt it. To many people and to little manpower, even with auxiliary forces, to do it.

 

[caketastydelish]

Not that I disagree- I don't know nearly enough about the topic to judge- but what's your reasoning for that?

Because they seemed to invade everybody who they could have.

This is just like those people that say "could the south have won the american civil war?" well if they could have, they would have.

 

[Lord Baal]

Because they seemed to invade everybody who they could have.

This is just like those people that say "could the south have won the american civil war?" well if they could have, they would have.

If France could have evacuated their government to Algiers or London and continued to fight Germany in 1940, rather than surrendering, they would have.

If Germany could have closed down the Dunkirk bridgehead, destroying the British forces in Continental Europe rather than allowing them to retreat, they would have.

If the US could have conquered all of Mexico in the Mexican-American War, they would have.

If the US and its allies could have conquered North Korea in the Korean War, they would have.

If the PRC could have taken Hanoi in their invasion of Vietnam, they would have.

If Britain and France could have secured the Suez Canal in 1956, they would have.

If the US could have conquered Iraq in the Gulf War, they would have.

If the US could have adequately occupied Iraq after the Iraq War, they would have.

Do I need to continue?

 

[caketastydelish]

Considering you're only proving my point, no.

 

[Lord Baal]

Considering you're only proving my point, no.

How exactly am I proving your point? Unless you really think none of those things were possible.

If the Western Allies could have executed Operation: Torch without the Germans getting troops to Tunisia, they would have.

If Germany could have conquered Malta, they would have.

If Napoleon could have established a stable French hegemony of Europe, he would have.

If Rome could have conquered Carthage in the Second Punic War instead of the Third, it would have.

If Germany could have invaded Sweden in WWII, it would have.

If the US could have successfully invade Cuba during the Cold War, it would have.

If Ho Chi Minh could have unified Viet Nam as early as the mid-50s, he would have.

If France could invaded Germany in 1936, it would have.

If the USSR could have conquered Finland in 1940 or 1944, it would have.

 

[caketastydelish]

Thanks for providing even more examples for my point.

 

[Lord Baal]

Thanks for providing even more examples for my point.

Cut the horsecrap. Make an actual bloody point. Just because something didn't happen, doesn't mean it couldn't happen. If you honestly believe that, you're a fool, and I don't think you are, so make an actual point.

 

[caketastydelish]

Cut the horsecrap. Make an actual bloody point. Just because something didn't happen, doesn't mean it couldn't happen. If you honestly believe that, you're a fool, and I don't think you are, so make an actual point.

Those things could have happened if variables in factors in each scenario was different, but they weren't.

Yes, if you change this and change that about the circumstances, then yes, perhaps the Mongols could have invaded Europe.

But they didn't. The Mongol empire collapsed anyway,

 

[red_elk]

There were different reasons why they didn't do it.
But the question is whether they had technical possibilities to invade Europe - I think most likely yes.
They had all required military technologies, resources and manpower to do it. Their experience of capturing castles and successful defeating of European knights confirm their superior military tactics.
Mongol Empire was definitely a superpower of XIII and part of XIV centuries.