What would've happened if Subutai wasn't recalled? Could he have really conquered the Holly Roman Empire or even France?

>tfw Christian Europe had a chance to remove kebabs and muslims forever if they had supported Ilkhanate (Nestorian christian/Buddhist) and Golden Horde. But instead choose to be a retard and let both of them be islamacized.

Ok so what if Subutai wasn't recalled and Ogedei lived for another decade?

bump

The French killed Pope Boniface and the Templars thereby starting the decline of the Church

Then Europe would be toast.

Subutai/Ogedei's had already planned out his invasion of Europe and rough timeline for that. I don't remember the exact estimate given by Subutai's plan but it was about a decade or less for full invasion of Europe.

no imposible
Despite what breathless History Channel pop-documentaries and Mongol fanboys would have you believe, probably not.

Yes, anyone who has done even the most cursory reading on the large-scale punitive raid into Europe 1240-41 AD will know that the Mongols caught the eastern Europeans by surprise and dealt them serious defeats in the field at Liegnitz and at Mohi through superior tactics and generalship. But no, this does not mean that this army would have conquered Europe if it had not been recalled (it was too small). Nor does it mean that a much larger force is likely to have done so either. There are a number of clear historical reasons this would have been unlikely:

1. Geography, logistics and historical precedents

Firstly, the Mongols were not the first Eurasian horse nomads to attack Europe, though they were the first who had done so for several centuries. From the Third Century to the Ninth Century western Europe has seen the Sarmatians, the Huns, the Alans, the Avars, the Khazars and the Magyars all emerge from the steppes and invade, usually via the plains of the Hungarian Basin. Some of these peoples made it as far west as what is now France and Italy, but none managed to establish a permanent foothold west of what is now the eastern Balkans.

This is because of geography and the logistics of horse nomad battle tactics. Beyond the Hungarian Basin, Europe becomes totally unsuited to large horse armies. There simply isn't the pasture to sustain the string of 5-15 remounts needed for a nomad warrior to maintain the kind of lightning campaign that could give them a strategic advantage over the armies of sedentary cultures. Attitla's Huns established a large hegemonic "kingdom" based on the Hungarian plains with its core further east on the Ukrainian steppes, but his "invasions" of the Western Roman Empire were little more than massive plundering raids and shows of strength. They quickly ran out of steam once the Huns got too far from large supplies of fodder for too long.

Later nomad horse armies ran into the same problem. Avar and Magyar raiders inflicted crushing defeats on western European armies, but were never able to follow up with any kind of invasion or occupation. Ottonian German feudal armies learned that the further a Magyar horse army got from its steppe base the more vulnerable it became.

People with a knowledge of the terrain of modern Europe find this difficult to grasp. They see wide open countryside, rolling hills of farmland and can't understand why a Mongol army of the kind that had conquered similar pastoral countryside in China could find Europe so impossible. But Europe in the Thirteenth Century did not look like Europe today. Most of that open countryside was still thickly forested; and not the highly cultivated, open, park-like "forest" of modern Europe, but mainly thick wildwood forest of a kind modern Europeans never see outside of some national parks in eastern Poland. This was not nomad horse-army country. Those modern rolling hills of farmland were impassible by horse and those strings of 5-15 remounts would be dead from starvation within a few weeks. Any Mongol army foolish enough to try to force its way through this terrain would soon find itself having to walk back though hostile territory, with most of its horses dead. And there goes the famous Mongol tactical superiority.

2. Western European Strategy and Tactics in the Thirteenth Century

Strategy and tactics develop in a given context. This means that while the Mongols' art of war developed on the steppes and suited that context, the armies of feudal Europe developed in the far more enclosed and constrained terrain of their context. What worked on the plains of Eurasia and could be adapted to China and Russia would not work well at all in western Europe.

And this is not just a matter of the lack of fodder and room for wide strategic manoeuvre discussed above. A combination of factors (terrain, political fragmentation, logistics) meant that war in western Europe from the Third Century onward had led to a lower emphasis on large-scale, set piece battles and the development of a warfare of manoeuvre, skirmish and siege, with field battles usually on a smaller scale and mainly only when one side with a clear advantage caught the other on the hop. Many wars were fought with no open battles at all, though with a lot of harrying, skirmishing, manoeuvre and many sieges.

This meant that from the Ninth Century onwards, Europe became a land of castles and the art of fortification and the corresponding art of siege warfare were both raised to increasing heights of sophistication. This is why in the two centuries before the Mongol invasion of Europe, Medieval Europeans were able to hold the Crusader Kingdoms in the "Outremer" despite being overwhelmingly outnumbered - masterpieces of the art of fortification like Kerak, Montreal and Krak des Chevaliers were based on centuries of perfecting the art of castle building. In a fortress like those or their equivalents across Europe, a populace could wait until a besieging army simply starved itself into having to withdraw.

Those who note that the Mongols were good at siege warfare underestimate precisely how good they would have to be to conquer western Europe. Yes, Mongolian use of Chinese siege tactics could storm fortresses (though Chinese siege tactics were inferior to those of western Europe in key respects). But in Europe they would have had to mount thousands of such sieges, bogging down their armies for months at a time with every single one. The sheer number of castles in Europe in this time is staggering - in 1241 they numbered in the many tens of thousands. And combined with the terrain and the logistical problems already noted, they would represent an almost endless succession of obstacles that a Mongol army intent on conquest would simply not have the capacity to overcome.

Bypassing them would only work in the short term and doing so consistently would be nothing more than a large-scale raid. Ottonian Germany showed over and over again that it could always defeat the Magyars in the long term by retreating into castles and then harassing the bogged down nomads through the forage-free forests. And while people make a lot of the victories of the Mongols in Hungary in 1240, we hear much less about the disastrous Golden Horde Mongol campaign in 1285. Learning from the 1240 campaign, the Hungarians had defended their kingdom with a network of western European-style castles. Unable to take them all, bogged down and constantly attacked, a depleted Mongol army began to retreat and was intercepted and comprehensively defeated at Pest by Ladislaus IV and then finally destroyed on the retreat home. This, rather than the earlier campaign in Hungary, gives us an insight into the reception a Mongol invasion would have received further west.

3. Religion and Politics in Western Christendom

In the sudden and unexpected blitzkrieg of the Mongol incursion of 1240-41, the politically fragmented nature of western Christendom worked in the favour of the invaders. The various rival states of Europe were in no position to mount any kind of short-term co-ordinated response and what response was thrown together - eg by the Teutonic Order in response to the incursion in Poland - was small scale and piecemeal. Some argue that this fragmentation means that western Europe would have been easy pickings for the Mongols, who had readily conquered much larger polities and so would have picked off the divided kingdoms of Europe.

In fact, the fragmentation of Europe was actually to its advantage, at least at first. Larger, more centrally-organised and more cohesive polities had fallen to the Mongols very quickly because of the rapid capture of a central capital, the defeat of a supreme leader or the capitulation of two or three vital centres, they precipitated the collapse of resistance. In Europe, the fall of Hungary and Poland may have caused alarm further west, but it had no greater impact than that. If the Mongols had managed to annex Croatia or even parts of the jigsaw of states that made up the German Empire, this would have had no effect elsewhere. And as the points above make clear, that piecemeal approach would not have been as easy as some armchair generals make out.

Then there is the fact that western Christendom would not have remained disunited for long. Two hundred years earlier a much less rich, less populated and less militarily sophisticated western Europe had sent a succession of allied armies thousands of kilometres east to capture, against the odds, wide swathes of territories in the Middle East. The religious fervour of the Crusading movement had led to remarkable military feats and victories against the odds by armies from all over Europe, united by a fanatical zeal for (as they saw it) the defence of their faith.

This zeal was still strong in the Thirteenth Century, so the idea that western Christendom would not harness that ideological power in the face of a threat not only to their homes but also to their local holy places - pilgrimage sites, holy shrines, cathedrals and monasteries - in the face of invasion by pagan hordes is unthinkable. And that level of religious fanaticism goes a long way when it's combined with patriotism and the protection of vested interests. The Mongol invasions of Syria and Mamluk Egypt were crushed by a similar combination and, along with the difficulties already noted above, this would be a massive force multiplier for the defenders of western Christendom.

Conclusion

While it is possible to argue any hypothetical either way, the idea that the Mongols would simply roll westward to the sea is rarely based on a detailed analysis of the relevant factors. No other horse nomad invader managed a permanent extension of territory much beyond the Hungarian Basin, and for good reasons. The Mongols were more numerous and more militarily powerful than any of those predecessors, but the obstacles facing any longer term conquest of Europe were so formidable that it is highly unlikely they would ever had done more than inflict some short-term if devastating raids beyond Hungary. Medieval Europe would have been too tough a strategic nut for them to crack.

>impossible
>probably not

successful invasion doesn't equate to permanent dynasty.

mongols invaded mountains, deserts, plains, forested regions, cold winters, extreme summers, rivers, forts, cities, villages, towns etc. European exceptionalism argument is just a faulty logic meme born from correlation, not causation. Hell, Genghis Khans grew up near a heavy forested area in Mongolia.

>mongols were able to defeat the chinese, the arabs, the other nomadic tribes, the russians, the hungarians, the polish, b-b-but they can't defeat the germans/french because they're d-d-different
K E K

>mongols dealt with christians, buddhists, chinese religons, muslims, jews, pagans, shamans, with highly developed politics of china, medium developed arabic politics and lightly developed politics of nomads etc
>b-b-but they can't deal with western christian feudal lords

In conclusion, you're a retard.

no you are the retard ,the second invasion in hungary when all the castles were restructures like of the western part mongols were incapable of doing anything and were destroyed in HRE they were 12000 castles alone and with aforce of 50000 to 100000 max is imposible to conquer anything ,when mongols anfter the second failed invasion only return home 20000

12000 castle in HRE alone if you think such a small force could invade anything when they failed miserably in the second invasion you are a retard beyond believe

>the second invasion
After Subutai has died

After the Mongol unity was fractured

After the Mongol empire was fragmented

This was half a century after the Mongol advances were stopped by the death of the khan.

it doent matter is imposible to crack down how such a small force a well defended western eurpe like it has been demostrated in hungary ,you didnt read anything do you ? your little superpan were more than happy to retire home after being incapable like all their antecessor of put a firm foot in western europe and being exterminated time and time again

and the theory the death of Ögödei was the root cause of the termination of the European campaign is very old. It was first presented 1245 by Giovanni Carpini. But it appears the true root cause were demoralization due to unexpected casualties and setbacks and logistical difficulties. Why else the Mongols would have spent over half a year at Pannonian plains after hearing the news of the death of Ögödei?
deal with it your little superman were incapable of conquering europe

kek the delusional mongols and their minions you failed and failed hard

Learning from the 1240 campaign, the Hungarians had defended their kingdom with a network of western European-style castles. Unable to take them all, bogged down and constantly attacked, a depleted Mongol army began to retreat and was intercepted and comprehensively defeated at Pest by Ladislaus IV and then finally destroyed on the retreat home. This, rather than the earlier campaign in Hungary, gives us an insight into the reception a Mongol invasion would have received further west.

i would extract this part for the more lazy ones like yoursef

I really enjoyed these posts. Thanks user.

Subutai was recalled back for the new coronation of the khan. The new khan tasked him with conquering China instead.

Without leadership support mongols couldn't wage war against Europe. The second mongol invasion of Europe was done after the mongol power structure was split and Golden Horde became its own semi-independent mongol faction.

Because Subutai wanted a proper closure to the campaign, with Bela's death (most likley) as he was hiding around. He was called back and was reluctantly forced to pull back. The new khan then switched target and China became the main focus. This resulted in hostility between the new khan and the Batu (Golden Horde) faction and a war between the two Khan and Batu almost erupted but was instead delayed because the new Khan almost died only few years afterwards.

Apparently Mongols had problems with alcohol.

There's more forests in Europe nowadays than during the middle ages. Plus it's only flat land from Russia til the Netherlands

i wont molest to reply i would simply copy past is more than you deserve
Learning from the 1240 campaign, the Hungarians had defended their kingdom with a network of western European-style castles. Unable to take them all, bogged down and constantly attacked, a depleted Mongol army began to retreat and was intercepted and comprehensively defeated at Pest by Ladislaus IV and then finally destroyed on the retreat home. This, rather than the earlier campaign in Hungary, gives us an insight into the reception a Mongol invasion would have received further west.
with gengis khan or without him their fate was sealed

Thread is about Subutai, so the second mongol invasion and the third mongol invasion are not relevant. They are ~50 years to centuries apart.

Subutai was the one that led the 1240 campaign. Are you guys retarded or something? The thread is about Subutai and his extension. Not one 50 years after this. After the mongol empire has fractured. After Europe had 50 years time to build up stone castles and ample enough warning/time to get used to gun powder.

Imagine the difference between WW1 and WW2. A lot changed as a direct result of the first mongol invasion and with nearly 50 years of preparation time.

no is relevant because you fucking retard because the mongols with face a contruction western europe like the face 50 yeas after in hungary

Chill out slav man. Take the time to think about your reply.

they simply copy a western europe defensive castles nothing more and they cant be comparedd really they were a shadow of what other european western kindom really were so if you cant defeat a improvised defensive castles in estern europe you think you can defeat the original and well constructed that they were in HRE ,more than 12000

While Mongols were quite capable of sieges, most of their sieges were conducted against large cities with populations to feed that wouldn't be prepared for a drawn out siege.

However Europe was littered with thousands of castles, often placed in very defensible positions that on their own had no real strategic value, however would be thorns in the side of an advancing mongol horde if they didnt stop to capture every single one

The Mongols in the Ilkhanate and the Mongols in Golden Horde were not the same you fucking brainlet.

>Berke, the ruler of the Golden Horde, westernmost part of the Mongolian Empire, demanded the submission of Louis.[21] On the contrary, Mongolian Emperors Möngke and Khubilai's brother, the Ilkhan Hulegu, sent a letter seeking military assistance from the king of France,

King Louis gathered an army after the Poles and Hungarians were defeated and prepared to set out to Eastern Europe to confront them.
Of course they withdrew before then.

"We shall either send the tartars bac to hell, or they will send us to paradise."

...

As for what would have happened if the Mongols had carried on their invasion "to the ultimate sea" as they had so ominously planned after defeating the Rus, it is difficult to say.

We cannot know what different European rulers would have defected and joined team Mongol, however given that the Russians mounted a somewhat unified initial resistance to the Mongols and that Western Europe was bound together against non Christians at this time by Catholic crusader sentiment, it is not unlikely that the Monarchs of Western Europe (HRE, France, England) would have formed a large force to confront the Mongols together.

The ensuing confrontation between these armies, I believe, would likely have been a victory for the Westerners akin to Ain Julut in Palestine. The large Western army would likely have triumphed by the slightest of margins against the Mongols by virtue of its sheer size and with the aid of Europe's forested landscape.

A chronicler reports that Frederick received a demand of submission from Batu Khan at some time, which he ignored.[25] He apparently kept up to date on the Mongols' activities, as a letter from Frederick II dated June 1241 comments that the Mongols were now using looted Hungarian armor.[26] A letter written by Emperor Frederick II, found in the Regesta Imperii, dated to June 20th 1241 and intended for all his vassals in Swabia, Austria, and Bohemia, included a number of specific military instructions. His forces were to avoid engaging the Mongols in field battles, hoard all food stocks in every fortress and stronghold, and arm all possible levies as well as the general populace.[27] Thomas of Split comments that there was a frenzy of fortifying castles and cities throughout the Holy Roman Empire, including Italy.[28] Either following the Emperor's instructions or on their own initiative, Frederick II, Duke of Austria paid to have his border castles strengthened at his own expense[29] while King Wenceslaus I of Bohemia had every castle strengthened and provisioned, as well as providing soldiers and armaments to monasteries in order to turn them into refuges for the civilian population.[30] Mongol probing attacks did materialize on the HRE's border states: a Mongol attack on Olomouc failed (the leader being captured in a sortie), a force was repulsed in a skirmish near Kłodzko, 300-700 Mongol troops were killed in a battle near Vienna to 100 Austrian losses (according to the Duke of Austria), and a Mongol raiding party was destroyed by Austrian knights in the district of Theben after being backed to the border of the River March. However a full-scale invasion never occurred, as the Mongols spent the next year pillaging Hungary before withdrawing.[31] After the Mongols withdrew from Hungary back to Russia, Frederick turned his attention back towards Italian matters.

They would have slammed into an unbreakable German wall of fortresses and crossbows.

What did German fotresses look like?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castel_del_Monte,_Apulia

The Holy Roman Emperor mentioned above built this fortress during his reign.

Very interesting. And they had what, hundred of these scattered through the empire right?

They had similiar experiences in Korea and Hungary so I don’t think it’s possible to subdue a much more economically advantage state.

>Yfw the mongols never genocided the polish subhumans, only to be defeated by the holy roman übermensch
Also, these instructions are from june 1241, while legnica and mohi were in april. Shows that it took no more than a few months for the europeans to draw the correct conclusion from the hungarian and polish experience.

>It has neither a moat nor a drawbridge and some considered it never to have been intended as a defensive fortress;[1]
Great example there user.

He didn't pick the best example, no. But the general point he made is still correct. The mongols had no chance to subjugate europe simply because europe was both too far away and too hard a target.

great post user

Also, for what its worth, this German emperor was considered the antichrist by the Catholic church.

So the Mongols would have been fighting the official anti-Christ had they invaded further.

>Subutai was recalled back for the new coronation of the khan
do people really still believe this? it was a fucking story made up by a god damn monk who thought that god had struck down the khan and saved christendom. that's the only fucking thing attesting to it. subutai didn't even return immediately, he dicked around in russia for a while. the golden horde's chronicler even states directly that they retreated for other reasons, not the khans death