How far into Europe could the Mongols have gone if Ögedei hadn't died?
>>268963
I honestly would have to take a look at the European maps of the time and see where the grasslands ended and the forests began to give you a good answer.
>>268969
Of course.
>>268963
Britain
>>268963
Considering they had heavy losses against Poland, relying on the lack of discipline in their opponent as well as gas, and that they literally lost in the upper parts I would say not very far.
>>269020
>Small force of mongol scout destroy Poland/Hungary days apart
I'd say mongol losses were acceptable for a new frontier. They lost so much more during the Chinese expedition.
>>269019
Well, if a little tribe like the magyars could raid that deep into Europe I don't think the mongols would have a problem conquering Europe.
Also the Huns conquered most of Germany, which was probably even more forested then than it was by the time the Mongols came around.
And if the Mongols were serious about conquering Europe they'd bring troops from places they already conquered that could fight well in Europe's terrain.
>>268969
ehh, the mongols invaded vietnam - a jungle. they lost but they did enough damage for the kingdoms that controlled vietnam to give in and allow the mongols to rule over them.
>>269035
their German conquest were fleeting and lost relatively easily. Also I would argue the Mongols are operating thousands of miles away from there power base, while the Magyars were in the middle of there power base.
>>269044
again look at the distance
>brother tells him he drinks too much and can only have one cup of alcohol a day
>has a giant cup made for himself
cheeky
>>269035
How many warriors could the magyars field?
>>269019
>as well as gas
Que?
>>269212
Gas or smoke, it was used to disorient the infantry and cavalry. You see accounts of it being called a "foul cloud" so take it as you will
>>269201
Somewhere around 10,000-15,000 based on the grasslands in Pannonia.
The Avars also utilized Hungary as a base and their raids struck deep in the Balkans and parts of Western Europe.
The Mongols couldn't go beyond Hungary because there's nothing much to plunder in Western Europe compared to China and the Near East. If anything, India would be a more prudent target. Steppe archers have conquered it before so that would be a priority over the cold wet forests of Germany.
Daily reminder mongolian ponies cant eat european oats
>>268969
Yeah because Siberia and Russia totally were just grassy plains.
>>269341
Most of Siberia wasn't under real control and a lot of Russia was close to grass land. Plus as you know the Russians were not directly controlled but rather under a harsh vassal system.
>>269341
You do realize they failed to properly subjugate the natives in Siberia?
Were the Mongols the only people to successfully invade Russia during the winter?
Where does this meme come from that Mongols could only conquer steppe anyway? They fucking conquered China and Persia, and mountainous as fuck Central Asia.
>>269371
Poles did it too
>>269371
>invade Russia
They invaded the Kievan Rus, you're fighting principalities not a nation.
>>269377
Like most of /his/ retarded ideas, I'm going to guess Dan Carlin made up it.
Then people who rarely leave their bedrooms and no idea what a steppe even looks like just believed it.
>>269034
Wasn't that actually Subodai? I know he had a force of like 12000 people and rampaged through half of eastern Europe.
>>269883
Dan Carlin's Wrath of the Khans is actually great
I'm guessing these people just don't want to believe Europe could be conquered
>>269377
its not a meme no one fights that they could conquer non steppe land. but it is undeniable that being on land that was able to support horse archer was a huge part of their military strength. You have to ask how much resourses were the mongols were willing to spend to conquer a back water like Germany that was full of castles and not as conductive to horse archers as their the lands of eastern Europe. Realize Germany was not nearly as rich as a land like India and Egypt but the mongols conquered neither of these regions. So, why would the mongols put all these resources towards conquering a land that was not that valuable.
>>269377
>>269883
I remember reading it on various Total War forums like 10 years ago when MTW2 was all the rage. I think it's a european self defense mechanism that triggers.
I'm a Euro.
I think the mongols would have gotten far. I also don't think Liegnitz or Mohi were Pyrrhic by any stretch of the word, In fact most sources seem to suggest they were decisive victories so I don't know where all these made up figures come from.
In the end it boils down to this:
Would the european take the mongol threat seriously?
Would the rally to a crusade as they did against Islam?
Would the Pope call for knights across Europe to take up arms against the mongols?
In this case maybe the Europeans could have stayed them off. But if not, then the mongols would just have taken Europe one kingdom at a time. Allied some of them and devestated some of them. For instance, I can imagine them allying say, France to attack England and Germany or something like that. The alliance would be a mirage tho, France would really just have been subdued to a client kingdom.
There is no doubt in my mind that had the mongols really put their mind to it, they could have conquered Europe. The more relevant question is probably this:
Was their Empire focused and stable enough from within and without for them to actually give Europe the focus it needed to be conquered?
The answer is obviously No since that's not what happened. And don't give me that "The Khan died" bullshit, because they elected a new one and could have tried again, but then something new happened or their priorities changed, yada yada yada.
>>269947
This guy is the smartest guy in the thread. The mongols as an army were the best in the world but there state building ability left a lot to be desired
>>269331
Yeah they could. Unlike european war horse their diet didnt *need* to be supplemented with oats, but they could eat them.
>>269370
Siberia was fully subjugated. They paid tribute and gave men for troops.
>>269947
>I don't know where all these made up figures come from.
Because our numbers are solely speculation. The actual sources say it was 50,000 knights who rode out at Legnica. I think we know that it's a bloated number, especially considering the actual nobility in the region numbered 2,500. Templar numbers vary from sources saying 500 to 88, to hundreds of peasants and 10 knights. The problem with these speculations is that they're exactly that, speculations. Each person has their bias and interpretation so that's pretty much all it boils down to.
I'll just state my position outright. No. Poland was notoriously shit at the time, Bela reports on how he wish he made proper stone castles as France and many other kingdoms did. Henry II's tactics were pitiful, bare minimum which basically consisted of sending charges at whim. In fact, the entirety of Legnica was decided on poor judgement of the European leaders, whilst the knights and infantry performed well. The mongols didn't confront Bohemia after the battle so we can assume they knew wiser and that it was simply not worth the losses. Crossbowmen were noted to do much more damage than anticipated. The Croats did a toll as well, they would set up ambushes in the mountains and the mongols had quite a bit of trouble with this. Amade Aba beat them in the north as well. Both these campaigns are sparse in documentation but it still counts for something.
As for unification, well Poland was in a fractured state, but still saw some unity. Fredrick II was directly threatened and Louis IX said he wanted to go on a crusade against them, in fact, the pope called for one, but as with many others it dissipated quickly.
Legnica was merely a diversion of Mohi, we know that. It was an invasion, Subotai was commanding it and they wanted to capture Hungary and planned to enter the HRE. It failed to grant any results save some fairly insignificant victories which got no territorial gains, thus it was downgraded to merely a raid
>>268963
Just gonna post this here.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Mongol_invasion_of_Hungary
>>269947
If the Mongols wanted to, they would have conquered Europe even if all of Europe joined together. They conquered areas with more powerful armies without the terrain that favored them. The Muslims fought both the cream of Europe and the Mongols. The Mongols made a much larger mark. The Mongols had good Chinese siege engineers.
The thing is, there would be no point in doing this. They had China, the richest, most powerful and most technologically advanced area of the world at the time. They had Persia. Also richer than Europe.
And closer to them, there was the Egypt. As it was closer to them than Western Europe and much richer. It would make no sense for them to waste resources on Western Europe.
>>270228
>Invasion of the Golden Horde
Which means:
>No troops and siege engineers from the Yuan
>No troops and siege engineers from the Chagatai Khanate
>No troops and siege Engineers from the Ilkhanate.
This invasion was hardly the best that the mongols could do.
Don't forget that the last khan who had direct control over all the khanates was Möngke, and he died in 1259.
>>268963
Bohemia/Germany
France if we're being optimistic
How did the Mongols manage logistics and navigation in general? Did they have roads and a postal service?
>>270833
They maintained roads and had a pony express set up that could relay messages very quickly
>>270820
France would not be a problem. The hardest part to conquer would be England, for similar reasons to Japan.
>>270895
How do you see them going against 1000s of german stone castles and dense forrests?
>>270895
>for similar reasons to Japan
A great storm sunk the horsenigger fleet every damn time they tried
Hadn't the nips had fucking god on their side the mongols would have probably crushed them.
>>270911
Germany was deforested as fuck from the population explosion of the medieval warm period
>>270940
And the castles?
>However, stone castles had significantly better fortunes; none of the few Hungarian stone castles fell, even those deep behind the Mongol lines. When the Mongols tried to use their siege engines on the stone walls of the Croatian Fortress of Klis, they did absolutely no damage, and were repelled with heavy casualties.[7] A similar thing happened when they attempted to capture the citadel of Esztergom, despite having overwhelming numerical superiority and 30 siege machines which they had just used to reduce the wooden towers of the city
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Mongol_invasion_of_Hungary
Europe was poor at that time, so they didn't really give a fuck.
>>270911
If they had their Chinese and Persian engineers, easily. The waves mentioned here >>270951 didn't have them.
>>270933
The 1st invasion, yes,
The 2nd invasion, the Japanese managed to hold them off and would likely win even without the storms.
If the English managed to fortify themselves (like the Japanese did in the second time), they could do something similar.
>>270911
Euroexceptionalism strikes again.
Northern mongolia/siberia is full of dense woodland and it barely gets a mention because they conquered it so easily. Genghis had entire tumans made up of people raised in the dense forest.
Mah castles. After conquering some of the greatest engineering nations on the planet the mongols are going to struggle with european castles because....?
>>271020
because European castles are stronk
>>271020
Have you even seen European castles? One of the main reasons why Hungary was being besieged but never conquered were those fucking castles.
>>271039
This.
Chinese built their fortresses out of bamboo and rice paper.
The sandies just couldn't into build wall.
The mongols had never seen this level of pure concentrated FUCK YOU anywhere before coming to Europe. The chinese made the tactical mistake of building only one wall. Medieval Europe was batshit crazy about walls and turrets. Walls and turrets everywhere.
>>271020
>>271013
>>271039
But look at the stone castles in Hungary during the invasion in 1241, every source says that the mongols failed to besiege them.
They had already chinese and persian siege experts with them during the first invasion and still couldn't manage to destroy the castles.
>But while the Mongols claimed control of Hungary, they could not occupy fortified cities such as Fehérvár, Esztergom, Veszprém, Tihany, Győr, Pannonhalma, Moson, Sopron, Vasvár, Újhely, Zala, Léka, Pozsony, Nyitra, Komárom, Fülek and Abaújvár.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasion_of_Europe
>>271108
But we're talking about the Mongols and not about the Turks. Completely different animal and structure of warfare.
>>271108
>And the Chinese had best siege engineers than them.
And the mongols brought said engineers to Europe. And they got absolutely btfo by European defensive strategies.
>>271062
The Ottomans would disagree with your view. They conquered a large part of Hungary and only didn't conquer all of it due to the Habsburg Empire putting their entire weight against them.
>>271132
>bringing up the Ottomans when we're discussing the Mongols
Jesus fucking shit people
>>271112
>>271130
The Mongols didn't stay a long time in Hungary to siege all castles. IIRC, they stayed just a few months where they mostly spend the time looting the countryside.
In China, it took them something like 70 years to conquer one of the Kingdoms.
>>271129
It was not the Turks, but the Egyptians.
>>271136
That guy said Hungary was never conquered due to their castles. Except that it was.
>>271172
Nope, it wasn't they only lost control of the hungarian plains. Strong fortified position held on and were never taken by the mongols.
Hungary also never paid tribute to the mongols.
>>269926
No this is fucking wrong.
Stop this fucking meme, Dan Carlin is alright but why do people keep bringing up Wrath of the Khans.
Every 5 fucking minutes he's trying to relate mongols to hitler, every 4 minutes he talks about horse archers, and every 3 minutes he says "I just want you to realize that those history revisionists want you to think the mongols weren't bad guys, but heres why they are bad guys"
Holy fuck he mentioned marco polo like fucking once, barely got into Kublai at all, did a couple things about the political intrigues but otherwise fucking nothing about house alliances.
He's fucking trash, but his podcast is alright for people who don't have the time to really get into history.
>>271172
I'm that guy and I specifically meant it wasn't conquered during the Mongol conquests. Reading comprehension and context m8.
>>271183
The guy said Hungary was never conquered because of its castles. But eventually, it was conquered by the Ottomans.
Castles are not conquer proof.
If the Mongols spent the energy they spent on China and for many decades actively tried their best to conquer Europe, they would. Europe was much, much weaker than China. The Mongols stayed only something like 6 months in Hungary. Compare that to the 70 years against one of the Chinese Kingdoms.
>>271187
Well actually yeah I haven't read that book and have no clue who Dan Carlin is but the Mongols are the closest in history we have to pure evil. Nazis were lightweight.
>slaughtering people and civilians even after surrendering
>destroying everything in their path like locusts, burning libraries, beheading scholars, raping everything with a hole
>Genghis Khan explicitly saying he's the wrath of God punishing people for their sins
>bringing nothing of value, no development, no discoveries, no achievements apart from avalanches of destruction and taxing their subjects up to tits
They were like IRL Zerg horde. I'm legit convinced that Russia and the islamic world remain backwards shitholes to this day presicely because of Mongols.
>>271213
>But eventually, it was conquered by the Ottomans.
You fucking retard, the Ottomans in the mid to late 16th century had an access to cannons and other forms of heavy weaponry, they weren't a Zerg horde relying on horse archers.
And that said, only the Pannonian plains of Hungary got fucked, the northern area (modern day Slovakia) which was mountainous, heavily forested and heavily fortified was never conquered by the Ottomans. See pic.
>>271220
That isn't the point of their history, he could have gone far more into depth about Subutai's small tactics besides just feint retreats.
They did a lot more than just fucking feint retreats, or maybe say 1 fucking thing about the pony express or 2 fucking things about their currency.
All he did in 4 episodes was talk about how evil they were, in the same way that hitler is only talked about how evil he was but nothing is said about the economic systems reformation, or how the currency was able to pickup without international banking support.
Dan Carlin is not a good podcaster, he can tell a story pretty well (imo), but his entire script for Wrath of Khans probably said evil, hitler, deaths, murder, rape, and horse archers than I'll ever need for the next year.
Yes it is important to remember these things, but continually drilling them instead of building upon them is not a way of answering historical revisionism.
>>271237
Do you really think that the people that conquered China would really not conquer Hungary if it was profitable enough for them?
>>271239
Again: I don't know who Carlin is, nor do I care. If he's wrong then so be it.
>>271249
>do you think people who conquered 5 squabbling Ching Chong dynasties with papier-mache shithouses couldn't conquer a country with some of the most brutal fortifications in history
Yeah that's exactly what I think, actually.
>>271260
You are the European equivalent of Afrocentrists.
>>271239
So what you want is to listen to John Green fellate the Mongols instead
>>271269
to be fair, Europe did conquer the world.
>>271269
>Mongols haven't conquered it
>BUT THEY WOULD IF THEY TRULY WANTED TO, BAKA!
And you're delusional as fuck.
>>271272
non sequitur faggot.
>>271287
>but anon, we were just PRETENDING we were shit
>That Hungary was stronger than fucking Persia and China?
Persia? No. China. Yes, by far.
>>271294
Ah, I see. You are a troll.
>>271299
>RIES! CHINA STLONG! SILLY GWAILO MONGORS STLONGEST EMPIRE EVEL CUZ THEY BEAT MIGHTY CHINA
Just because there was a ton of them it doesn't mean they weren't shit.
>>271299
If the mongols were so strong then why did they loose to the Mamlukes around 5 times in pitched battles?
>>271294
What part of Chinese history actually makes them appear strong? That they were around for long or that there are a lot of them? I mean credibility do they have as a strong fighting for historically?
So from what I gather, on the scale of battles and sieges, Europeans had shit organization and mobility compared to the Mongols, and only beat them by turtling? Why were European fortifications more defensible than Chinese structures that the Mongols besieged effectively?
>>271410
The Mongols sent 40k soldiers to raid Europe for a couple of years. In China, they had 200k strong armies for decades.
If the Mongols decided to send 200k armies to Europe for decades, Europe would be conquered.
It is similar to how the Umayyad didn't want to conquer France.
>>271410
A castle contains nothing but the people defending it basically. It has no value on its own except as a fortification and Mongols didn't need/use those.
Chinese fortified cities contained huge amounts of plunder and people.
Of course they could crack any European castle but was it worth it?
>>269056
Mongols were nomadic and could thus move their power base. It's the reason they were so successful 2bh.
>>271410
I think you have to understand that by the time the mongols got to europe they had the absolute best siege craft on the planet. They enslaved persians who were finally able to bring down the chinese walls and then enslaved their engineers. The turtle up strategy was used to great effect by the chinese for years but it didnt do them any good.
You could argue that the chinese relied on walled cities whereas europe had castles which are more armed forts and alot of them. I would counter argue that china is significant larger and had more settlements they (mongols) had to subdue.
Ultimately if they really wanted to they could but it would prob lead to mass unrest across the entire empire. It wasnt worth while.
>>271391
The Song dynasty was absolutely massive. By far the richest nation in the world and with one of the most technically advanced armies of the time. Even the Jin dynasty in the north had access to gunpowder weapons.
If the Mongol Empire wasn't fractured, and if Hungary wasn't some back water far away from the Mongols power base I have no doubt they would've conquered it.
>>271260
Are you hungarian?
Nothing Hungary had compared to the walls and fortress cities in China and Persia.
Central Asia also used to be a vibrant bustling and important cultural region for humankind until the mongols rolled in.
>>271479
>The Song dynasty was absolutely massive. By far the richest nation in the world and with one of the most technically advanced armies of the time.
>>271578
>thinking gunpowder weapons are nor advanced for the 1200s
>>271578
What exactly do you disagree with?
I think some people think that because European/Western countries were stronger in the last 3 centuries, that was always the case.
Why does a mere hypothetical situation trigger Euros so hard it drives them into a revisionist rage?
>>271633
Because the mongols never killed our dad and raped our mum
>>268963
You mean, like, if he was immortal?
>>271578
>Cannons
>Rockets
>Not advanced
>>271479
>By far the richest nation in the world and with one of the most technically advanced armies of the time.
As much as I agree here I think it's important to note the military incompetence of the Song throughout much of its existence, what with how much trouble they had with the Khitan and the Jurchens turning on them and literally carving away half the empire the moment they noticed how ineffectual Song troops were.
You had brief moments of greatness with guys like Lu Wende, but it seems like the central government's paranoia of competent generals and the complete separation between the imperial court and its armies really hamstrung the Song.
That being said it's a testament to their military engineering and defense-in-depth strategy that they managed to hold out so long--though I imagine a lot of this was due to the climate differences as well (i.e., Mongke's death).
I bet you guys think that the romans couldnt conquer Germania.
>>271717
>I bet you guys think that the romans couldnt conquer Germania.
If they really wanted to, they could. But why would the Romans do that?
Just like if the US wanted to, they would conquer Zambia. That's more or less what it would be for the Mongols to conquer Hungary or for the Romans to conquer all of Germany.
>>271439
Castles merely contained the leaders of the country in Europe, where as it contained the entire cities on the other side.
Fortified city of Xi'an is something like couple square miles of walled area. Cities were noted for having million+ population so defense wasn't hard.
>>271717
they were defacto vassals that turned on them.
Well Europe could easily conquer China if they wanted to right now, while we're talking hypotheticals.
The fact is the Mongols didn't conquer Hungary and everything else is just horseshit fantasy.
>>271816
>Italy conquering anything
>>271816
Europe has no logistics right now. They won't be conquering anything except their neighbors to the south, Africa.
The Mongols could have easily reached the atlantic if they had sent a force larger than what subetei had. Someone crunched the numbers about the Mongol conquest of the middle East and determined that the Mongols could only afford to feed 100,000 horses and pack animals that they would take on campaign with them. meaning that if you account for remounts(which each Mongol could have upwards of 5), the pack animals that the Mongols companion caravans would take with them and the general locations where they are recorded to have stopped for grazing, the Mongol force that conqured the middle East was no larger than 20k. That means that the force that snuffed out the assassins and did the Baghdad rivers of black and red was smaller than what any Arab or Persian chronicler guessed.
Also, the Mongols would have more than likely had western Europeans allies by the time that they would have reached the German territory, Mongol intelligence was amazing at finding the right puppets to do their bidding, see the destruction of the kawarasmshah
>>271816
>Well Europe could easily conquer China if they wanted to right now, while we're talking hypotheticals.
China has nukes. Hundreds of them. When you have hundreds of nukes, no one can easily conquer you.
And right now, European armies are in poor condition.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2015/02/19/germanys-army-is-so-under-equipped-that-it-used-broomsticks-instead-of-machine-guns/
>Germany’s army is so under-equipped that it used broomsticks instead of machine guns
>>271816
Lol good luck getting european armies from europe to china, the mongols could campaign all over the continents because their entire fighting force was mounted on horses and they could live off the land.
The crusaders struggled to maintain an army of even 5000 in the levant.
>>271865
>China has nukes
I agree that Euros wouldn't be able to take China, but the Anglos and especially the French have a quite a big stockpile as well.
>>271874
Whoever has hundreds of nukes won't be conquered, unless by the way the Anglos and French are being conquered.
>>271863
>Mongol force that conqured the middle East was no larger than 20k
That's wrong they assembled 150 000 or 15 tumens just to take on baghdad and the assasines.
>>271863
Its already been established they couldnt take european fortifications without investing alot more time and manpower.
Once theyve taken one castle, theres another one 20 miles on,eventually the diminishing returns of time and manpower would drain the mongols, and then theres still another kingdom and all its castles before they reach the Atlantic.
My assumption, after two invasions of europe, the mongols decided it wasnt worth the investment, and stopped attacking
>>271908
More like they'd stop wasting time on castles and invest time in harassing, then the knights in castles would have to come out and defend or else the entire population would be sacked.Leaving them no real power.
>>271919
I guess that what they did in hungary and it didnt give them victory.
>>271919
Yup. Their siege technology was top notch too.
Castles wouldn't save France from the Mongols if they wanted it. The English would probably be the only ones relatively safe.
>>271936
>I guess that what they did in hungary and it didnt give them victory.
About 30,000 Mongols stayed 6 months in Hungary looting. Hungary lost about a quarter of its population. Then, heard that the Great Khan had died and returned to Mongolia.
Compare this with this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_conquest_of_the_Song_dynasty
450,000 soldiers
And Mongke himself was involved. It was not a small raid like the one in Europe.
>>271969
>The results of the invasion could not have contrasted more sharply with those of the 1241 invasion. The invasion was repelled handily, and the Mongols lost much of their invading force due to several months of starvation, numerous small raids, and two major military defeats.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Mongol_invasion_of_Hungary
>>272000
That was after the Khan died, General Subutai dead, and the empire was under political division. The horde wasn't the same after those.
>>270833
It was actually a pretty cool system of couriers across the steppes with depots of fresh horses and supplies. Kind of like the American pony express. There were official plaques that let people know you were on official business if I recall correctly.
>>272020
and bringing a larger army would lead to more starvation, so making the invasion not worth it.
>>268963
Vienna :^)
>>271908
What's the point of takig a castle if you just can siege it, round it and take the surrounding resources?
>>272043
But they did field large armies in china and the middle east.
>>271092
>Chinese built their fortresses out of bamboo and rice paper.
I know you're trolling, or retarded because you called it "pure concentrated fuck you" but you triggered me.
Stephen R. Turnbull (2003). Genghis Khan & the Mongol conquests, 1190-1400. Osprey Publishing. p. 31. ISBN 1-84176-523-6. Retrieved 2011-12-25.
> [Zhongdu's] walls, which were built on stamped clay and crowned with crenellated brick battlements, measured 18 miles (28km) in circumference and reached a height of 12 m (40 feet). Twelve gates gave access to the city, and there were 900 towers and three lines of moats.
>>272128
Mongols had been riding around and destroying stuff for long time even after this defeat and it was effective. So have other armies in the past and future.
Starvation and ambushes are caused by bad leadership/logistics capability
>>272128
Maybe because mongols were idiots regarding to resources management... they were not farmers, nor cattle breeders nor fishermen.
>>271865
I'm including Russia as a part of team Europe.
>>268969
>and see where the grasslands ended and the forests began
Some people really underestimate the range and types of terrain the mongols fought in and how they assimilated defeated foes technological arsenal into their evolving strategies.
The Caucasus weren't grasslands.
Much of China isn't grasslands.
Much of the Iran isn't grasslands.
Much of India and Southeast Asia aren't grasslands.
>>270554
>The Muslims fought both the cream of Europe and the Mongols. The Mongols made a much larger mark.
Remember the 'muslim' world was pretty fragmented. Muslim Iran and Iraq fell. The mamluks of Egypt defeated an equivalent Mongol force though.
>>272397
If you're referring to Ain Jalut, defeating a holding force of one division that you have a numerical advantage over isn't really "equivalent".
>>271130
>And the mongols brought said engineers to Europe.
Their initial invasions were actually military successes. Teh second attempts they failed but this was because those European countries had changed tactics. Had there been no interruption and a more dedicated focus on taking Europe then the first invasions would have wiped Europe.
>>268963
Would it matter? The territory was too large for central rule while relying on horse messengers.
>>271816
>easily conquer China if they wanted to right now
Even that is debatable.
A large part of warfare is political will and national support.
Europe does not have that. China does.
>>272455
>Europe
>National support
If there's a place where the concept of nation is diluding, it is Europe
>>272455
Not to mention the european logistics for long range campaigns- which didn't even exist kek.
>>270833
>Did they have roads and a postal service?
Yes, throughout the empire. Armies were typical nomad fashion of scavenging
