# Could the Mongols have conquered Europe? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 8, 2011, 4:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-the-mongols-have-conquered-europe/599007 "2011-10-08T16:03:53Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![smiling\_bandit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e9a140/32.png) [@smiling\_bandit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smiling_bandit)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2011, 7:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-the-mongols-have-conquered-europe/599007/21 "2011-10-11T19:53:50Z")
> [@Sage\_Rat](#): > > That’s like saying that the Mongol’s couldn’t conquer Asia because there’s no one target you have to best to conquer all of Asia. > > Well they did conquer Asia. They did it by taking down one nation at a time. Holding Europe would be far harder. It was common in Asia for one victory to extend Mongol control for a hundred miles. In Europe, it’d be closer to a hundred feet. It gave European monarches fits, with large siege trains and far more convenient logistics. ---
**Author:** ![Tamerlane](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tamerlane/32/7602_2.png) [@Tamerlane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tamerlane)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2011, 7:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-the-mongols-have-conquered-europe/599007/22 "2011-10-11T19:54:49Z")
> [@fasteddie9318](#): > > That is often said, but in the same sense that a lack of pastureland may have hindered the Mongols’ ability to permanently conquer Europe, Masson-Smith and Amitai have argued that the Levant simply didn’t have the grazing and/or water resources necessary for the Mongol army (or, maybe more accurately, didn’t have them in combination with one another; areas with enough water during the dry season wouldn’t have offered nearly enough grazing). Yes. I meant it in the same sense - it’s often said, but it may be an exaggeration. The Mamluks are often cited as an example of a group that was particularly well-suited to engaging the Mongols. The Mongols superior strategic mobility was partially negated by the limited approaches to Syria. As long as the Mamluks stayed on the strategic defensive and used scorched earth tactics ( which they did ) to funnel Mongol offensives and deny them remounts, they could largely dictate the general area of engagement or at least limit their mobility. And once battle was joined the Mamluks, mounted archers themselves and highly disciplined as an elite “mercenary” force, could stand off and engage at range on an equal footing with the Mongols. Or, more heavily armored and on their larger, stronger, probably faster grain-fed horses, they could charge and engage in melee to greater effectiveness. Granted there were other issues at play including the multiple fronts they forced to engage on, but in all the tense decades of conflict between the two powers the Il-Khans were only ever able to score any significant success against the Mamluks in 1299, when they reportedly had a large numerical superiority ( and the Il-Khans ended up being defeated fairly decisively in 1303 and had to retreat again ). However I’d say one real difference is that the Mamluks were the _only_ significant independent Muslim power left at that point and they had a rough enough time at Ayn Jalut against a skeleton rear-guard ( albeit a significant one ). Sheer numbers alone might have told against them if the imperial army under Hulegu had hit them full force. Given the precarious social standing of the Mamluks in Egypt as a completely imported military regime, one or two heavy blows might have broken the state. Hard to say at a distance, but the Mamluks appear to have been paradoxically both a more formidable opponent than any individual European power, but also more vulnerable to defeat. ---
**Author:** ![Tamerlane](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tamerlane/32/7602_2.png) [@Tamerlane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tamerlane)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2011, 8:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-the-mongols-have-conquered-europe/599007/23 "2011-10-11T20:06:11Z")
> [@Malthus](#): > > That depends. To an extent, you can compensate by foraging directly off the countryside. Which is what nomads entering western Europe invariably did, as I noted. Cluster at areas of pasturage that was afforded them. But it did make them more predictable and prone to ambush ( which repeatedly happened to the Magyars ). Just as an addendum, I’m not a horsey guy, but I’m assuming that like most critters switching diets that radically would cause all sorts of intestinal upset, leading to at least short-term loss of combat effectiveness. Can a life-long grass-fed pony quickly adjust to suddenly switching to fodder under campaign situations? I have no idea myself. > [@](#): > > The difference is I think that the Huns, Avars etc. tended to behave more like the later Golden Horde - that is, live in a state of _parasitism_ off of settled societies, treating them somewhat like a slowly-renewing natural resourse (see comments about foraging off of pesants above). Honestly the Mongol empire was very much like that all over. It was an extractive, parasitic economy on an imperial scale. While some of the later Yuan emperors may have developed different ideas, even China was generally treated as a source of well-organized loot. Remember one debate in the early Mongol state was whether to ethnically cleanse northern China and transform it into pasturage. Luckily some semblance of reason prevailed. > [@](#): > > As good a point can be made that the early death of Ogedei certainly saved Europe much grief, even if the question of outright conquest cannot by its nature be answered. I tend to think that the actual obsticles to conquest have been somewhat exaggerated by present-day historians in reaction to the earlier “but for Ogedei drinking himself to death, Europe would be Mongol” line. Over-zealous revisionism? Perhaps - I probably tend towards being revisionist friendly in many things. But I’ll at least agree with “saved Europe much grief” point. Whatever else may have happened, the Mongols still had plenty of fight left in them in 1242. ---
**Author:** ![Kobal2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kobal2/32/20_2.png) [@Kobal2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kobal2)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2011, 9:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-the-mongols-have-conquered-europe/599007/24 "2011-10-11T21:16:42Z")
> [@Tamerlane](#): > > Which is what nomads entering western Europe invariably did, as I noted. Cluster at areas of pasturage that was afforded them. But it did make them more predictable and prone to ambush ( which repeatedly happened to the Magyars ). > > Just as an addendum, I’m not a horsey guy, but I’m assuming that like most critters switching diets that radically would cause all sorts of intestinal upset, leading to at least short-term loss of combat effectiveness. Can a life-long grass-fed pony quickly adjust to suddenly switching to fodder under campaign situations? I have no idea myself. Well, Attila didn’t seem to have much issues and he went as far west as Paris (then Lutecia). I do remember reading the glues that held Hunnic (and Mongol) compound bows together tended to suffer and eventually disintegrate in humid climes though, so going further north into Scandinavia, England or even Flanders could have been problematic on that front assuming that information is correct. ---
**Author:** ![smiling\_bandit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e9a140/32.png) [@smiling\_bandit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smiling_bandit)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2011, 10:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-the-mongols-have-conquered-europe/599007/25 "2011-10-11T22:10:48Z")
> [@Kobal2](#): > > Well, Attila didn’t seem to have much issues and he went as far west as Paris (then Lutecia). Only partly true. Attila had a great deal of trouble and could never make any victory amount to much. Moreover, the land was far more open in those days, with lots of wildlands, no fortresses, and often no angry locals whatsoever.. ---
**Author:** ![PeteyBoy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/5f8ce5/32.png) [@PeteyBoy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PeteyBoy)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2015, 12:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-the-mongols-have-conquered-europe/599007/26 "2015-04-03T00:55:27Z")
Amongst the problems the Mongols may have faced was that western Europeans were culturally, ethnically, and linguistically different people than the steppe dwelling Turkic-Mongols. Defeating someone in battle, and then incorporating them into an empire are two different things. It’s easy to focus on military victories as the main driver of Mongol success, but they were just as adept at integrating conquered people into their empire. The Romans faced similar problems as they got away from the Mediterranean. European heavy cavalry had trouble on open plains, but in narrow valleys lightly armored Mongols would have had real trouble with the shock combat the armored knights preferred. Without mobility the Mongols might have been crushed. They would also have been troubled by archers firing from protected positions in forests and atop hills. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2015, 2:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-the-mongols-have-conquered-europe/599007/27 "2015-04-03T02:52:29Z")
> [@PeteyBoy](#): > > Amongst the problems the Mongols may have faced was that western Europeans were culturally, ethnically, and linguistically different people than the steppe dwelling Turkic-Mongols. Defeating someone in battle, and then incorporating them into an empire are two different things. It’s easy to focus on military victories as the main driver of Mongol success, but they were just as adept at integrating conquered people into their empire. The Romans faced similar problems as they got away from the Mediterranean. They were, but so were the Chinese, the Koreans, and the Persians, and the Mongols managed to rule them well enough. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2015, 3:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-the-mongols-have-conquered-europe/599007/28 "2015-04-03T03:11:08Z")
> [@PeteyBoy](#): > > Amongst the problems the Mongols may have faced was that western Europeans were culturally, ethnically, and linguistically different people than the steppe dwelling Turkic-Mongols. And the Germans were culturally, etc., different from the Romans. They still managed to conquer and hold the Western Empire. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2015, 3:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-the-mongols-have-conquered-europe/599007/29 "2015-04-03T03:14:30Z")
> [@Tamerlane](#): > > Logistics would somewhat mitigate against it. Mongol ponies were exclusively grass-fed and the Carpathian Basin was the last _large_ grazing area capable of supporting any grass-fed army until you hit the Atlantic coast. It was actually a problem for the early Magyars for similar reasons long before the Mongols arrived on the scene. If the CB produced enough grazing for ~150,000 - 300,000 ponies ( various estimates ), that doesn’t translate to a very large army, as multiple mounts were needed for each warrior, not to mention that many of those would have been ruled out ( the Mongols overwhelmingly preferred mares and only occasionally geldings - never stallions ). While deep raids were possible as far afield as France they were also somewhat dependent on stepping stone “islands” of western grazing that made nomad movements predictable in the west and thus prone to ambush. But, why would the Mongol ponies have to be grass-fed? Every country in Europe was growing (and still grows) cereal crops. The Mongols could simply, everywhere they conquered, demand their tribute in the form of wheat or oats or barley. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2015, 3:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-the-mongols-have-conquered-europe/599007/30 "2015-04-03T03:25:39Z")
> [@Tamerlane](#): > > Honestly the Mongol empire was very much like that all over. It was an extractive, parasitic economy on an imperial scale. Think the _Star Trek: TOS_ episode [“Mirror, Mirror.”](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirror,_Mirror_(Star_Trek:_The_Original_Series)) **That** kind of empire. Bandits/pirates/mobsters as kings. The Terran Empire was willing to exterminate the Halkans for resisting its demands – the Mongol Empire had a similar policy. From [the TVTropes article on Genghis Khan](http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/UsefulNotes/GenghisKhan): > [@](#): > > He’s mentioned far more in Chinese and especially central-Asian stories and culture than in western Europe, the latter having had very little if anything to do with him. In western European (and by extension north American) culture he is either shown as a tolerant and just ruler who helped bring order in a chaotic period, or as a ruthless barbarian who slaughtered swathes of innocents for personal gain. The truth is a mixture of the two. He was a revolutionary conqueror in Asia for the time in that he allowed almost total freedom of religion, did not impose on the cultures of the defeated, and established a vast and effective trade and postal network that were of great benefits to most parts of Asia - particularly given the long disintegration and decline of The Empire of the Song under the strain of fighting their fifty-year stalemate war with the Jurchens’ Jin Empire (Steppe nomads who had taken the entire north China plain from them, thus the ‘Southern’ Song). On the other hand, he was absolutely ruthless to anyone who dared to resist his Mongol hordes. He was not above biological warfare or using living prisoners as human shields. Plus, they would often massacre people who resisted. The Iranian plateau lost three-quarters of its population and didn’t recover until the mid-20th century. Entire cities were leveled to the ground as examples; to this day, some areas in Central Asia are disproportionately populated compared to their surroundings thanks to these _13th century_ tactics. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2015, 3:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-the-mongols-have-conquered-europe/599007/31 "2015-04-03T03:43:13Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > But, why would the Mongol ponies have to be grass-fed? Every country in Europe was growing (and still grows) cereal crops. The Mongols could simply, everywhere they conquered, demand their tribute in the form of wheat or oats or barley. How extensive was European agriculture? (I don’t actually know the answer.) Unless it was substantially better than subsistence level, demanding crops as payment would have simply meant that everyone, European and Mongol, would have starved by the Spring following the conquest. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2015, 3:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-the-mongols-have-conquered-europe/599007/32 "2015-04-03T03:58:56Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > How extensive was European agriculture? (I don’t actually know the answer.) Unless it was substantially better than subsistence level, demanding crops as payment would have simply meant that everyone, European and Mongol, would have starved by the Spring following the conquest. If European agriculture was sufficient to sustain social classes of agriculturally non-productive European warrior-nobles and churchmen, which it was, it would have been sufficient to sustain the Mongol cavalry after the Mongols cut off the heads of the European warrior-nobles and churchmen. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2015, 7:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-the-mongols-have-conquered-europe/599007/33 "2015-04-03T07:21:09Z")
This, of course, presumes that the number of invading Mongols and their horses would have been fewer than the number of nobles slain. ---
**Author:** ![Dissonance](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/85f322/32.png) [@Dissonance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dissonance)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2015, 9:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-the-mongols-have-conquered-europe/599007/34 "2015-04-03T09:58:23Z")
> [@PeteyBoy](#): > > European heavy cavalry had trouble on open plains, but in narrow valleys lightly armored Mongols would have had real trouble with the shock combat the armored knights preferred. Without mobility the Mongols might have been crushed. They would also have been troubled by archers firing from protected positions in forests and atop hills. Depriving the Mongols of mobility would have been quite an impressive feat. Mongol Tumen regularly covered 100 miles a day during the invasion of Hungary; modern mechanized armies can’t match maintaining that sustained pace of movement. European heavy cavalry did not fare well against the Mongols; the Mongols would simply use their vastly superior mobility to pick away at the heavy cavalry from a distance that the heavier cavalry could not close. Even if the arrows wouldn’t kill the knights from that distance, it would kill their mounts leaving heavily armored knights on foot that were then easy pickings for the Mongols own shock charge. A Tumen was only 60% horse archers, the other 40% were lancers. ---
**Author:** ![YogSothoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/8edcca/32.png) [@YogSothoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YogSothoth)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2015, 5:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-the-mongols-have-conquered-europe/599007/35 "2015-04-03T17:43:57Z")
Why did such a big empire fall apart and disintegrate to modern day Mongolia when so many other lands they took rebuilt and expanded their influence? Why isn’t modern day China, Russia, and parts of the middle east all part of New Mongolia? Was there such a gap between Ogedei and his rule and the rule of every other Mongol king that none were able to replicate even a fraction of the former’s success? ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2015, 6:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-the-mongols-have-conquered-europe/599007/36 "2015-04-03T18:27:47Z")
> [@YogSosoth](#): > > Why did such a big empire fall apart and disintegrate to modern day Mongolia when so many other lands they took rebuilt and expanded their influence? Why isn’t modern day China, Russia, and parts of the middle east all part of New Mongolia? Probably because there was no idea behind Mongol rule. They simply conquered and taxed. They did not try to make their subjects adopt Mongol language or culture or religion, and that probably would have failed to take if they had, most of their subjects had richer and more advanced cultures and knew it. Nor did the Mongols themselves assimilate to Chinese culture the way the Manchus did later. They remained simply foreigners to the Chinese, the Russians, etc., and it was psychologically easy for the Chinese, etc., to shake them off. ---
**Author:** ![Hector\_St\_Clare](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/b5ac83/32.png) [@Hector\_St\_Clare](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hector_St_Clare)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2015, 6:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-the-mongols-have-conquered-europe/599007/37 "2015-04-03T18:38:17Z")
> [@YogSosoth](#): > > Why did such a big empire fall apart and disintegrate to modern day Mongolia when so many other lands they took rebuilt and expanded their influence? Why isn’t modern day China, Russia, and parts of the middle east all part of New Mongolia? Was there such a gap between Ogedei and his rule and the rule of every other Mongol king that none were able to replicate even a fraction of the former’s success? It didn’t realy disintegrate to just ‘modern Mongolia’ (and there are plenty of Mongol homelands outside Mongolia- in Chinese Inner Mongolia and in various Russian subjects like Buryatia and Tuva. ) We call itt the Mongol empire, but my understanding is that by later in the game, their armies included as many ethnic Turkic soldiers as actual Mongols. And there are plenty of Turkic populations scattered across central Asia and eastern Europe, some of which have their own countries or self-governing areas. The Mughal Empire, which ruled most of South Asia until it gradually fell apart in the early 18th century, was run by a dynasty of Turkic-Mongol descent which at least purportedly claimed to be the successors of Gengis Khan. ---
**Author:** ![Hector\_St\_Clare](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/b5ac83/32.png) [@Hector\_St\_Clare](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hector_St_Clare)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2015, 6:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-the-mongols-have-conquered-europe/599007/38 "2015-04-03T18:39:51Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > But, why would the Mongol ponies have to be grass-fed? Every country in Europe was growing (and still grows) cereal crops. The Mongols could simply, everywhere they conquered, demand their tribute in the form of wheat or oats or barley. My understanding is that horses don’t do very well on grain (except maybe oats) and that grass is better for them. ---
**Author:** ![Ambrosio\_Spinola](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9de0a6/32.png) [@Ambrosio\_Spinola](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ambrosio_Spinola)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2015, 6:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-the-mongols-have-conquered-europe/599007/39 "2015-04-03T18:55:02Z")
> [@YogSosoth](#): > > Why did such a big empire fall apart and disintegrate to modern day Mongolia when so many other lands they took rebuilt and expanded their influence? Why isn’t modern day China, Russia, and parts of the middle east all part of New Mongolia? Was there such a gap between Ogedei and his rule and the rule of every other Mongol king that none were able to replicate even a fraction of the former’s success? There wasn’t really a good method of succession for the “Empire” as such - when it was personally under the control of Genghis it worked fine, and the first transition to Ogedei worked since it was still Genghis’ orders being followed, but then there were serious tensions in the transition to Guyuk. Then the start of Mongke’s reign included reprisals against Guyuk’s family and supporters, and then after Mongke’s death there was open civil war to choose the next leader. Kublai won the Khanate, but won the support of some powerful factions basically on the condition that he not ask them to actually do anything, which he was okay with since his attention was primarily on China. Basically the empire had already fragmented into various fiefdoms controlled by princes who weren’t powerful enough to control all the “Mongol Empire” but likewise were strong enough to not have to obey central authority. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2015, 7:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-the-mongols-have-conquered-europe/599007/40 "2015-04-03T19:06:45Z")
> [@Hector\_St\_Clare](#): > > My understanding is that horses don’t do very well on grain (except maybe oats) and that grass is better for them. [No, horses do well enough on (some) grains.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equine_nutrition#Grains) [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-the-mongols-have-conquered-europe/599007.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-the-mongols-have-conquered-europe/599007.md?page=3)