Da 759 2008: Fill & Download for Free

Because this is a question about something that had never happen or been attempted, I would rather give my insight on the various misconceptions about the Mongol Invasion of Europe.Personally, I would say it would be rather likely that the Mongols could take Europe. The Mongols could attack other part of Eurasia using large force without withdrawing their forces in China, if they spend the time for it, they could attack Europe with the same force they used to attack the Middle East under Hulagu.In my opinion, the real problem would be the range between Europe and Russia and how the Mongol reinforce their losses, not so much in European fortification or army.The following misconceptions are the one I feel I need to correct.“Mongol arrow would not penetrate European armor, because Seljuk arrow cannot”-Not all bows were made the same and even different arrows make a difference in penetrating armor.“But the deadly arrows of the Tatars penetrated to their mark every time and brought death even more surely. For no breastplate, shield or armor was proof against the shots leveled by the Tatars’ hands.“by Thomas of SplitThis was crucial in several encounters where the Mongol pretty much finish the fight with arrows alone.Battle near Pest:“When they did the same [burning/killing, then withdrawing at unexpected times], Archbishop Ugolin of Kalocsa…. went out, against the king’s order, with a few men and wanted to have battle with them. But they [the Tatars] turned their backs and began slowly to retreat. Seeing this, the archbishop spurred his on his horse and gave them chase. Eventually, they reached a marshland and they crossed it swiftly. The archbishop did not notice this when he was quite close to them and hastily entered it. Being weighed down by their armor, he and his men could neither cross nor return. But the Tatars turned around quickly, surrounded the marsh and killed them all with a shower of arrows. The archbishop escaped with three or four men and returned embossed to the city, quite irate because of the loss of his men and that the king did not send any help to them”by Rogerius of ApuliaMongol arrow head was hardened in salt water, this might be one of the factor in penetrating armor.Giovanni da Pian del Carpine on Mongol arrow hardening:"...according to the Tartars' custom, dip them red-hot into salt water, that they may be strong enough to pierce the enemies' armour."“Mongol never fight knights on large number”-Unlike popular misconceptions, the Mongol did fight knights constantly in Poland.Battle of Tursko - WikipediaBattle of Chmielnik - WikipediaBattle of Tarczek - WikipediaBattle of Opole - WikipediaFrom the Annals of Jan Dlugosz on the European forces in the Battle of Legnica:“The Prince arrays his army on level ground near the River Nysa in five ranks: the first consists of crusaders and volunteers speaking several languages, and some gold miners from Zlotoryja; the second line is made up of knights from Cracow and Wielkopolska; the third of knights from Opole; the fourth of the Grand Master of the Prussian Knights with his brethren and other chivalry; while the fifth consists of Silesian and Wroclavian barons, the pick of the knights from Wielkopolska and Silesia and a small contingent of mercenaries, all under the command of Prince Henry himself.”All of those battles in Poland resulted in “… the flower of the knights of Cracow, Sandomierz, Wroclaw and Opole has been killed, so that these lands are all but deserted …”“Asian armor was bad compared to European armor, Asian soldier were lightly armored”“East European army was closer to Asia, therefore they must wear Asian equipment, had Asian organization and therefore they were inferior to Western Europe”East Asian armor of that period was likely more protective than European mail armor at that time.Lamellar was overall more rigid more protective against arrow and thrusting weapons than mail. The blast furnace used in China and Central Asia also produced steel with higher carbon content which was a lot harder than the low carbon steel made using bloomery in Europe.Song Dynasty armors were tested before they were used.From Xu Zizhi Tongjian Changbian:“Now I ask to order all the smiths to cold forge pure steel armor and sent them across the frontiers, using bows of 8-9 strength to test them and give out punishments or rewards for how deep the arrows penetrate.”Russian armor with the exception of the Great Helm possibly had more rigid components than contemporary Western European armor.1200–1240 - Russian vambracePre-Mongol Russian plate armor - likely upper arm armor - this was also used by the previous Khazar and BulgarFrom Wikipedia on Hungarian force in the Battle of Sirmium in 1167:Choniates describes the Hungarian army as being composed of knights, archers and light infantry. Contemporary Hungarian armies often lacked infantry and Byzantine sources possibly referred to servants and other camp followers as infantry. The soldiers of the front rank of the Hungarian cavalry are described as being heavily armoured, and mounted on armoured horses.[20][20] Choniates, Niketas; Magoulias, Harry J. (trans.) (1984). O City of Byzantium: Annals of Niketas Choniates. Detroit, Michigan: Wayne State University Press. ISBN 0-8143-1764-2Middle Eastern warriors had access to Jazerant and lamellar armor which they often worn together, though their armor coverage were often lesser than European armor.Mongol armor in Europe was described as being made of leather, yet they were considered impenetrable by European accounts.From a letter in Chronica Majora:“Out of the tanned hides of these animals, they (Mongols) made for themselves armour of a light description, but impenetrable.”From Thomas of Split:“As armor they use coverings made out of bull hide and fitted together like plates, which are nevertheless impenetrable and quite secure.““Mongol cannot take a single stone castle/fortress/city, even those behind Mongol line”-From “Transylvania in the Second Half of the Thirteenth Century The Rise of the Congregational System” by Tudor Sălăgean:Page 39“The Mongols then laid siege on Sibiu, conquered on April 11 at the end of a fierce resistance.”“The royal fortresses were strategically important for the invaders. As a consequence, the amplitude of the destruction was considerable. With no exception, the county seats of Transylvania (Alba-Iulia, Dăbâca, Cluj, Turda, Cetatea de Baltă, and Hunedoara) were conquered and burned down while their fleeing population was massacred.”Page 40“However, it is noteworthy that some fortresses like Alba-Iulia, Dăbâca, and Sibiu were surrounded by fortified stone walls, which yet failed to boost their resistance capacity.”This, of course, were not exhaustive as archaeological excavation could reveal even more stone castles and cities that were destroyed by the Mongols.The often mentioned lack of stone castles ignore the fact that not all castles in Hungary/Romania was owned by nobles, but also by knightly orders, German colonists and bishops.This also did not include the possible stone castles in Poland and other Eastern European countries that was possibly taken by the Mongol.Golden Gate, Kiev - Wikipedia“The stone fortifications stretched for only 3.5 km.”Kiev had stone walls and it was still taken by the Mongol.Castles or cities having a mix of stone walls and palisade was also something done in Western Europe in the 13th century as the conversion from wood to stone continued until the 14th century.Windsor castle in 1216Carisbrooke castle in the 14th century in the middle of conversion to fully stone construction“Asian fortifications were inferior, because they weren’t made the same way as European castles”“Asian fortifications did not had citadels”“Asian fortification/city was not specialized for defense, while European castle was”“China did not had castles”Fortifications were made according to the means of warfare and resources available, so not all fortifications were made the same, this did not mean that they would always be inferior to European castles.Chinese city walls having a rammed earth core was very resistant to even modern artillery.Chinese city wall - WikipediaIn fact twentieth century explosive shells had some difficulty creating a breach in tamped earthen walls. [26]“We fought our way to Nanking and joined in the attack on the enemy capital in December. It was our unit which stormed the Chunghua Gate. We attacked continuously for about a week, battering the brick and earth walls with artillery, but they never collapsed. The night of December 11, men in my unit breached the wall. The morning came with most of our unit still behind us, but we were beyond the wall. Behind the gate great heaps of sandbags were piled up. We 'cleared them away, removed the lock, and opened the gates, with a great creaking noise. We'd done it! We'd opened the fortress! All the enemy ran away, so we didn't take any fire. The residents too were gone. When we passed beyond the fortress wall we thought we had occupied this city.[27] “by Nohara Teishin26. Cook, Haruko Taya (2000), Japan At War: An Oral History, Phoenix Press27. Lorge, Peter A. (2008), The Asian Military Revolution: from Gunpowder to the Bomb, Cambridge University Press, ISBN 978-0-521-60954-8Every large cities in Central Asia had citadels, usually placed on a hill inside the city and usually far larger than any European castle. the citadels themselves might had separate walled compartments and different levels in height.Central Asia - Otrar city wall and citadelCentral Asia - Bukhara - Wall of the Ark (citadel) of BukharaCentral Asia - Samarkand city? or citadel?China - Song Dynasty - Taiyuan city with citadel and gate fortsChina - Song/Jin Dynasty - KaifengChina not only had fortified cities and defensive lines, but also forts, fortified villages and private walled estates.Buzi (fortification) - WikipediaThe density of the forts in such a small region (Tianshui and Dingxi prefectures) is already higher than any European country except Germany.Villages could fortify their villages, if they feel they need to.Even private houses could had walls.Siheyuan houses inside cities had double walls. With stone walls separating each houses, this reduced the danger of fire compared to European cities. These houses could act as separate small fortifications to protect the peoples, so each people in a Chinese city had their own walled fortifications.-Castles being specialized for defensive purposes was an oxymoron.In its simplest terms, the definition of a castle accepted amongst academics is "a private fortified residence".Coulson, Charles (2003), Castles in Medieval Society: Fortresses in England, France, and Ireland in the Central Middle Ages, Oxford: Oxford University Press, ISBN 0-19-927363-4A castle usually served as residence as well and for this purpose, it would had more vulnerable places needed for living which would not be present in military fortresses.“European castles were more sophisticated than Asian forts/castles/fortified cities, etc.”A large majority of European castles in the 13th century would probably be in the midst of converting to stone construction, a process which happened until even the 14th century.Only the most advanced and newly built castles were completely made of stone and had towers like Chateau Gaillard and Chateau de Coucy. These were not developed completely until the late 13th century. New features include towers and concentric constructions. Features like protruding towers and layered concentric walls had actually been used in the Middle East, Central Asia and China long before it was adopted in Medieval Europe.Even castles that had stone construction since the 12th century were less developed in the sense that they did not had protruding towers to shoot at blind spots beneath the walls. The Mongols took several stone castles in Hungary/Romania with more advanced layouts and better positions than Rochester Castle. Rochester Castle already need a large force for king John of England to capture, so much force that it was said "Our age has not known a siege so hard pressed nor so strongly resisted ... Afterwards few cared to put their trust in castles". That was despite the use of only 5 siege engines, the crusaders need 11 siege engines to take Acre in the Third Crusade.Compared that to the citadel of Kayseri which had stone walls and was taken by the Mongol in 1243. The citadel had protruding towers which mean the archers could shoot at the blind spot underneath the adjacent towers.“Mongols did not like fighting castles”According to Givovanni Pian del Carpine:“But it must be known that the Tartars prize it when men lock themselves in towns and fortresses rather then fight them in the field. Indeed they say that these men are little pigs closed in a pen around whom they place guards, as stated above.”“Mongol siege warfare was unable to capture European castle”The Mongol took several stone castles and cities and many earth-and-palisade cities and castles.One of them is the siege of the castle of Oradea which need only 7 siege engines.“We had the castle, which we saw damaged on one side, repaired with a strong wall, so that we could find refuge there should we be unable to defend the city. But when one day the Tatars suddenly arrived and my situation in the city was precarious, I did not want to go to the castle, but ran away into the forest and hid there as long as I could. They, however, suddenly took the city and burnt down most of it and left nothing outside the walls of the castle. Having collected the booty, they killed men and women, commoners and nobles alike, on the streets, houses, and fields. What more? They pardoned neither sex nor age. That done, they suddenly retreated, gathered up everything in the retreat, and settled at five miles from the castle.They did not return for days, and those in the castle thought that they had left because of the strength of the castle that was protected by a deep moat and wooden towers on the walls; there were many armored warriors there, and whenever the Tatars came scouting from time to time, the Hungarian warriors chased them on fast horses. When the Tatars did not come to the castle for several days and everyone thought that they had completely withdrawn from there, many of the warriors and others who were in the castle, confident that they had withdrawn, left the castle and moved together into the houses that still remained outside of it. Then, one day at dawn, the Tatars, whose whereabouts they could not know, rushed upon them and killed most of those who did not manage to flee to the castle. Then they immediately surrounded the fortification, set up seven siege engines across from the new wall and bombarded it ceaselessly with stones day and night until the new wall collapsed totally. They did not stop at all, and with the towers and walls demolished the castle was taken by storm. They seized the warriors, canons, and others who had not been killed by the sword in the attack.”Oradea castle in the 15th century - the 13th century castle already had stone walls and probably had the same layout - it was actually on top of a hill and surrounded by a deep moatIt would also be inside a city with its own city wallIt just need 7 siege engines to destroy a castle. In comparison, the Mongols brought hundreds of trebuchets in their invasion of Khwarezm for taking single cities and in China, it need concentrated firing from several hundred trebuchets just to create a breach or collapse a small part of a city wall.The siege of Esztergom was often hailed as the proof of the Mongol being unable to take European castles. Only a small part of the Mongol army attack Esztergom and probably only for a few days (the next siege was the siege of Szekesfehervar which was only a few days), at best it was a very heavy Pyrrhic victory for the Hungarians because Rogerius of Apulia recorded that only 15 survivors were left in the city. There was no mention of the Mongol using the siege engines against the citadel, they only used it against the city wall.Esztergom citadel was not the usual European castles, it was as large as Krak des Chevalier, located on top of a hill, bordered by rivers on half of its sides and being capital of Hungary would be the strongest place in Hungary.European castles might actually had a dangerous weakness. While the most advanced castle in Europe and Crusader castle often had stone floors, most castles in Europe even until the late 14th century had wooden floor and wooden roof.This means fire arrow that penetrate a tower could burnt the whole floors down and render the whole tower uninhabitable. Castle gates also had the same weaknesses.Late 14th century Bodiam castle tower with missing wooden floorThe Mongol Kaman-i-gav/Chuangzi Nu/Ox Bow/Giant Crossbow (which was never used by the Mongol in Europe) fired very large arrow tipped with gunpowder or “Greek fire” that burned continuously.It had the range of 1000–2500 m or more.“This range seems credible only with difficulty, yet strangely enough there is a confirmation of it from a Persian source, namely the historian 'Alā'al-Dīn al-Juwainī, who wrote of what happened when one of the almost impregnable castles of the Assassins was taken by Hulagu Khan. Here, in +1256, the Chinese arcuballistae shot their projectiles 2500 (Arab) paces (1,100 yards) from a position on the top of some mountain... His actual words are: "and a kamān-i-gāu which had been constructed by Cathayan craftsmen, and which had a range of 2500 paces, was brought to bear on those fools, when no other remedy remained, and of the devil-like Heretics many soldiers were burnt by those meteoric shots". The castle in question was not Alamūt itself, but Maimūn-Diz, also in the Elburz range, and it was the strongest military base of the Assassins.”by Joseph Needham-Bolts fired from the Chuangzi Nu was also strong enough to destroy buildings.In 759 AD, Li Quan described a type of multiple bolt crossbow capable of destroying ramparts and city towers:“The arcuballista is a crossbow of a strength of 12 dan, mounted on a wheeled frame. A winch cable pulls on an iron hook; when the winch is turned round until the string catches on the trigger the crossbow is drawn. On the upper surface of the stock there are seven grooves, the centre carrying the largest arrow. This has a point 275 centimetres (108 in) long and 125 centimetres (49 in) round, with iron tail fins 125 cm round, and a total length of 91.5 cm. To left and right there are three arrows each steadily decreasing in size, all shot forth when the trigger is pulled. Within 700 paces (525 m) whatever is hit will collapse, even solid things like ramparts and city towers.”by Li QuanOne of these arrows penetrating through the roof of a gatehouse/tower or penetrate through the arrowslit or walls would burn the inside of the tower and practically destroyed it.To change the flooring to a stone one would need complex stone vaulting or dome which the towers might not be suitable in the first place and the work itself might take many years to complete.Mongol use of “Greek fire” by Giovanni Pian del Carpine:“If they cannot take the place that way, they throw Greek fire. In fact, they sometimes take the grease of the men they kill and throw it liquefied onto the houses, and wherever this grease catches fire it burns as though it cannot not be extinguished.”-This weakness was not present in Central Asian and Chinese fortification which mostly had solid rampart or completely stone or brick construction.Solid structures would also be a lot stronger than the thin walled hollow tower and structures used in Europe and some part of the Middle East. The advantage offered by slightly more arrow slits on different floors are counteracted by a far weaker hollow structure and the ability of solid structure to be made bigger (because they were a lot more stable).Chinese city towers are placed on solid ramparts, if the towers were destroyed, the ramparts could still act as towersEven hollow Chinese fortification was mostly completely made of rocks or brick construction.Song Dynasty rampart with arrow holesChinese hollow tower/ramparts“There were tens of thousand of European castles, while Asian fortification was few in number”-It was often said that there was probably 100.000 castles built in Western Europe throughout the Middle Age, however, this did not show what the number of active castles at one time. The often mentioned 25.000 castles in Germany was the amount of castles built in centuries and during the Mongol invasion, some of them had been abandoned and some of them had not been built yet.Using the same logic, East Asia would be the most fortified place on earth at that time with all the Great Walls and canals existing, Central Asia would be filled with concentric separate fortified cities and castles placed very close to each other as well as lone standing castles, Russia would had the various long defensive walls and the walled cities built by nomads and the Middle East would be filled with plenty castles, forts and double walled cities as well; Europe would be very tame in terms of fortification compared to Asia.From the threadWhy the Mongol Invasions of Europe so small? - HistorumHackneyedscribe’s comment in Historum explained this better than I could. I would add my own comment in parentheses to clarify the context.Comment by Hackneyedscribe:—Source I used for Germany:Frederick I (Emperor of Holy Roman Empire) controlled at least 200 castles in Germany, possibly more [Indeed, Arnold of Lubeck claimed that when Otto IV married Philip of Swabia's eldest daughter in 1209, he received with her 350 castles, Arnoldi Chronica Slavorum, ed. J.M. Lappenberg]. The most powerful other prince, Henry the Lion, Duke of Saxony and Bavaria, possessed perhaps 50, and many of these were lost when he fell out with Barbarossa and was deprived of his duchies and most of his fiefs in 1180 [See the map of Henry's castles in Saxony in Jaochim Ehlers, Heinrich der Lwe. Eine Biographie, pg 125]. Furthermore, the emperor's lands and castles were spread over a much wider geographical area than were those of most of the other princes. -The Origins of German Principalities, 1100-1350: Essays by German HistoriansNow map of Henry the Lion's possessions, despite owning only 50 castles his territory make a significant part of German territory:Source I used for England:The other half of Painter's thesis, that the peak number of castles was reached around the year 1100, can only be confirmed in terms of probabilities. But there is firmer ground in the period after 1154, with the survival of the pipe rolls from the 1150s and the chancery rolls from the end of the century. Allen Brown exploited these records to construct his 'List of Castles 1154-1216' published in 1959. It contains about 270 castles in both 1154 and 1214; a total of 327 over the whole sixty year period. Since the pipe rolls, for instance, include not just royal castles but baronial castles even temporarily in the king's hands, it is likely that his list, in contrast to document-based lists for earlier periods - contains, as Brown claimed, a 'high proportion of active sites'. The large numbers of undocumented castles known only from survey must accordingly be assigned to an earlier period, with the implication not only that they were built before 1154, but that they had ceased to be in active use by that date, or soon afterwards. Documents can be misleading on this point: a phrase like 'castellum firmare' could mean to build a castle, or rebuild it, or just stock and prepare it for war - in some later sources this meaning is demonstrable. In general it seems reasonable to draw the corollary from archaeological evidence that castles occupied over long periods were repeatedly refurbished and rebuilt, to argue that sites not so treated were in use only for short periods. Even longer occupation could be discontinuous. -pg 48-49In 1969 King and L. Alcock gave a total of 1,062 known castles from eleventh and twelfth century England and Wales: 723 mottes, 198 ring-works, and 141 other stone buildings, though only the ring-works were named and described. Of these 770 are English and 292 Welsh- pg 48Motte and Bailey type castle:Source I used for France:Sometime between 1206 and 1210, after the great conquests were completed, the chancery clerks compiled a list of 113 "castles and fortresses King Philip holds.". These castles extended from Hesdin, Lens, and Henin (Pas-de-Clais) in the north........After the list was completed by 1210, Philip continued to acquire new castles in response to particular circumstances, but these additions were not sufficient to cause the compilation of a new inventory. -The Government of Philip Augustus: Foundations of French Royal Power by John W. Baldwin-“Motte and bailey castles did not disappear overnight. Just because something new [masonry donjons] was invented does not mean that everything of earlier design was immediately abandoned. Until the middle of the 13th century, many local landlords of relatively modest means could not afford, or were not allowed by their suzerains, to build masonry castles. Though many illegal or unauthorized stone castles were built, many low vassals had to be satisfied with rudimentary strong houses, simple towers, fortified farms and poorly defended manors. –Castles and Fortified Cities of Medieval Europe: An Illustrated History by Jean-Denis G.G. Lepage, pg 46”“Here's more information on English castles:Source: pg 3 and pg 4 respectively in the book The Castle Community, by John RickardHe wrote more than a page to show how he got the numbers, they include Chancery Records, The Patent and Fine Rolls, Close Rolls, Inquisitions Post Mortem (private ones undercounted), Exchequer Records and secondary sources Castellarium Anglicanum, Victoria County History, abd Emery's Great Medieval Houses.He also says at the beginning of his book: "A weak castle to one historian will be a fortified manor to another. For this study, such borderline cases will be considered as castles"—(The number of the English castles also include free standing towers.)-In conclusion, there were likely only hundreds of castles combined at most in the European area that would be invaded by the Mongols. The castles would likely be concentrated in some places and not spread out evenly. The Mongols could probably besiege some of the castles and then the way would be open for them to destroy the countrysides.European castles were also a lot smaller than Asian fortifications, which means the garrisons of castles were likely very small and unable to inflict much damage on Mongol forces. Krak des Chevalier, one of the largest European castle of the period, could only hold 2000 soldiers. Others like Rochester could only hold hundreds of soldiers. Other castle were even smallerChâteau de GisorsAlthough it has been estimated that the bailey could have housed 1,000 soldiers, in 1438 (during the Hundred Years' War) the English garrison numbered just 90. By 1448, this had decreased to 43.[2]2. Kaufmann, J. E.; Kaufmann, H. W. (2004). The Medieval Fortress: castles, forts and walled cities of the Middle Ages. Da Capo. ISBN 978-0-306-81358-0.In 1403, a force of 37 archers successfully defended Caernarfon Castle against two assaults by Owain Glyndŵr's allies during a long siege, demonstrating that a small force could be effective.[180]Source:Friar, Stephen (2003), The Sutton Companion to Castles, Stroud: Sutton Publishing, ISBN 978-0-7509-3994-2, page 123-124Not all castles were the usual big castles with towers as in popular depiction, some could just be a 2 story tower.Odiham castle, England - just a tower with palisades and moatCrupet castle, Belgium - just a keep and moatBedzin castle, Poland - previously composed of a stone tower with palisades, just like Odiham Castle, when it was destroyed by the Mongol“The Mongols were defeated the second time they invade Hungary and in the third time they invade Poland because the Europeans had more castles and knights than before”Actually, the official chronicles of Poland, Hungary, Austria and Galicia-Volhynia did not mention any victories for the Hungarians in the Second Mongol Invasion of Hungary.From Annals of Jan Dlugosz (Poland):“At the instigation of the Kumans, who have themselves suffered disaster at the hands of the Hungarians, the Tatars invade Hungary a fortnight after Epiphany and ravage it unopposed as far as Pest and Buda, and there they stay inflicting such damage that there is a shortage of draught animals and people have to harness themselves to their two-wheeled carts and ploughs. The Tatars depart after Easter, but only because of an epidemic that affects many thousands of them and compels them to leave Pannonia. In this same year (1285) the Tatars invade the territory of the Emperor of Constantinople and occupy much of his land.”-From Chronicon Pictum (Hungary):“A few of the Cumans who escaped sought refuge with the Tartars, and it was at their instigation that in the year of our Lord 1285 entered Hungary for the second time and spread a terrible devastation of fire throughout the whole country as far as Pest.”-From Anonymi Chronicon Austriacum:“M*.cclxxxv°(1285). Post natiuitatem Domini Comani et tartari. cum in numerabili multitudine intrauerunt Ungariam. et vastauerunt eam. et occiderunt et Deduxerunt ex ea in numerabiles viros et mulieres. Et paruulos. tandem vero ab incolis terre circa septem castra. turpiter sunt de terra fugati. occisis ex eis in numerabili multitudine. Reliqui vero qui euaserunt. quamuis pauci fugientes latitantes inter montes et valles nemorofas. Diuino iudicio fere omnes perierunt. Nam dominus qui ubique est protector in se sperancium. misit super eos Niues et pluuias ingentes. confractisque nubibus. super eos tanta inundacio aquarum irrupit. quod fere omnibus submersis pauci ex eis euaferunt.”-From Galicia-Volhynian Chronicle:“(February? 1285) 6790 (1282). The cursed and lawless [Khan] Nogaj set out against the Hungarians together with [Khan] Telebuga. [They came] in great force - with a great [host] of soldiers - and ordered the princes of Rus' - Lev, Mstislav, Volodimer, and Jurij Lvovic - to march with them. At that time Volodimer limped and did not [join the campaign] because he had a bad ulcer. However, he did send his army with his nephew Jurij. And thus they all went, for at that time the princes of Rus' were Tatar subjects. Volodimer alone remained [behind], because he limped. Boleslav, however, continued to pride himself in his recklessness. Finding an opportune moment, he came with two hundred soldiers and devastated the outskirts of Scekarev, taking ten villages, and [then] marched back with great arrogance, acting as if he had taken the whole country. Then Lev was dismissed [by the Tatars] when [they were already] in the Hungarian land.”“The cursed and lawless Nogaj started back with Telebuga, after they had pillaged the Hungarian land. [Then they separated], and Nogaj set out for Brasev, while Telebuga went through the [Carpathian] Mountains, which one could cross in three days. But he wandered thirty days in the mountains, driven [back and forth] by God's wrath. A great famine arose among [his men] and they began eating [their captives?]. Then they started dying themselves [so that] a countless number of them perished and eyewitnesses testified that there was a hundred thousand dead. [Finally] the cursed and lawless Telebuga made his way on foot out [of the mountains] with his wife and one mare. [And thus he was] shamed by God.”-In addition, Rashid al-Din said that Nogai conquered Hungary in 1285.From “Contextualizing the Mongol Invasion of Hungary in 1241–42: Short- and Long-Term Perspectives”József Laszlovszky, Stephen Pow, Beatrix F. Romhányi,László Ferenczi, Zsolt PinkeCorresponding author József LaszlovszkyCentral European University“Rashid al-Din, writing under Mongol auspices, described Hungary as a massive kingdom stretching from Cumania to the domains of Aquila and that its king commanded an “innumerable army.” Nonetheless, he contended that the Golden Horde’s Noqai had managed to conquer Hungary after attacking it incessantly.”-The accounts seems to imply that the Mongol successfully raid Hungary and only suffer heavy casualties because of plague or famine, not Hungarian knights, crossbowmen or castles.-The same thing applied to the Third Mongol Invasion of Poland:From Annals of Jan Dlugosz (Poland):“The barbarian Tatars, believers in the vile and blasphemous doctrine of the false Mahomet and enemies of all Christians, are suffering from a famine, to relieve which a horde of them under Nogay and Telebuga descends on Poland, devastating as it passes that part of Ruthenia it has to cross to get there, even though its inhabitants are already paying them tribute. Having collected quantities of provisions, the Tatars descend like a cloud of locusts on Lublin and Mazovia, moving on to Sandomierz, Sieradz and Cracow, despite severe frost and deep snow. They burn a number of monasteries, churches and fortresses in which people have taken refuge, but, on the advice of the Ruthenians accompanying them, refrain from attacking the monastery of the Holy Cross on Lysa Gora, only to be shamefully defeated after spending a couple of days vainly attacking the town and castle of Sandomierz. They reach Cracow on Christmas Eve and mount an attack, but lose some of their more eminent warriors and, abandoning the attempt, ravage the surrounding country instead. To do this, they scatter, so that it would have been possible to capture or kill some of them at least, had it not been for the heavy snow and the low morale of the Polish knights. Frightened by the situation, and having no confidence in his knights, Leszek takes his wife and some of his court to Hungary, and when the Tatars learn of this from prisoners, they ravage the country as far as the Pannonian alps.In these unhappy times, the Dowager princess Kinga with two of her sisters and seventy nuns from Sandek nunnery, together with a number of chaplains and knights, move into the castle of Pieniny, near the town of Kroscienko. This castle, on the bank of the Danube, is splendidly defended by its artificial defences and natural position, for the only access to it is by a narrow causeway, and here they all stay as long as the Tatars are active in the area.”“The Tatars, having distributed the loot they took from Poland and sold their Polish captives to various peoples, decide to leave Ruthenia and to destroy the Ruthenians before they go; unable to do this overtly, they poison the rivers and waters by placing in all still and running water stakes on which are spitted hearts taken from the bodies of Poles, killed for ritual purposes of divination, saturated with a very strong poison, against which no medicine is of any use, so that all who drink the water die. It is not until the poison has claimed a large number of victims that the Ruthenians stop drinking the water.”-From Galician-Volhynian Chronicle:“[In the meantime] Telebuga was marching into Poland in the company of all the princes [that were compelled to do so] by the Tatars: Prince Lev with his son Jurij, [Prince] Mstislav [at the head of his army] and [Prince] Volodimer [at the head of his]. And thus they marched on to Zavixvost and came to the Vistula. [This] river had not frozen yet, and they could not cross it. [Therefore] they marched to its upper reaches [at] Sudomir [where] they crossed the river Sjan over ice. Here on the Sjan Volodimer left them and went back. [Then] they crossed the Vistula over ice above Sudomir and approached the city from all [four] sides. However, they met with no success.(December/January 1286/87) [Thereupon] they began ravaging the Polish land, remaining in it ten days. Telebuga wanted to march to Cracow, but he did not reach it, turning back in Todk, for he learned that Nogaj [had reached] Cracow before him. And because of this there was [even] greater discord between them. Therefore, rather than join forces with Nogaj, [Telebuga] went back [and attacked] the Lvovian land [and its main] city - Lviv. (January 1287) [The Tatars] remained in Lev's principality for two weeks living off the fat of the land. They did not engage in open warfare, but neither did they let anyone leave the city for food. [Of those that dared] leave the city, they would kill some, capture others, and rob [still] others, [releasing] them stark naked [to die] from the cold, because there was a very severe winter [that year]. And thus [the Tatars] devastated the whole country.The accursed Nogaj [did not use the same route as Telebuga] to march into Poland. He took a [different] route in the direction of Peremysl' because there was great discord between them. He reached Cracow, but had no success [there] just as Telebuga had none at Sudomir. He ravaged the Polish land, but did not join forces with Telebuga because they were afraid of each other. [Then] they returned to their camps, Telebuga again using his route and Nogaj his.”-The Mongol devastated Poland, despite the remark that Leszek could gather an army of 30.000 cavalry in 1280.From Annals of Jan Dlugosz:“Realizing that attack is better than mere defence, Leszek assembles an army of 30,000 horse and 2000 first-class foot in a fortnight, and sets off in pursuit of Leo.”-If there were European victories, they were possibly not regarded as remarkable enough to be put in official chronicles. The chronicles did not treat these 2 invasions any differently from the previous Mongol invasion or later Mongol raids.“The distance was too far for sending their manpower and siege engines”The path from East Asia to Europe was mostly Steppe, so it should be easier and safer to transport forces from East Asia to Europe than from East Asia to the Middle East which had to pass rivers, deserts and mountains. There had been more success of Steppe polities in entering Europe than Steppe polities in entering the Middle East, China or India.The Mongols was not the first East Asian power to reach Europe, the 6th century Gokturk Khaganate also attacked Roman/Byzantine cities in Crimea.“European terrain were too hard to pass through for invaders”It did not prevent the Huns from pushing the Germanic tribes into a migration (which was something the Romans never managed to do) and this was done during the period in which the European forests were far thicker and uncultivated than 13th century Europe.The Magyars were also mostly unimpeded by such terrain. European terrain in the 10th century was also far less cultivated and more forested than 13th century Europe.Battle of Lechfeld (910) - WikipediaBattle of Püchen - WikipediaBattle of Brenta - WikipediaThe Magyars even reached Italy, despite of the Alps and river.In term of forest, Western Europe almost always had less forest than Eastern Europe in pre-industrial time.Of course, Central Asia, Middle East and China weren’t completely flat lands or Steppes either.China - there were very few flat landsLandscape near Hohhot, capital of Inner Mongolia, ChinaNorthern China mountainsGreat Wall near BeijingLoess plateau fissures - the fissures were several hundred meters deepCentral Asia - UzbekistanIran had many mountainous and hilly terrains.IranIran - Zagros Mountains - on the border between Iran and Iraq“Horse archers cannot fight in forest or mountainous terrain, they cannot pass rivers”The Chinese mentioned that the Xiongnu actually had great advantage in mountainous terrain, despite being horse archers.“... Now both the country and the tactics of the Xiongnu are different from those of the Chinese. Their lands are nothing but mountain-slopes with ways going up and down and winding through gorges in and out; in such regions our Chinese horses cannot compete with theirs. Along the tracks at the edges of precipices still they ride and shoot; our Chinese horse archers can hardly do the like. Rain and storm, exhaustion and fatigue, hunger and thirst, nothing do they fear; our Chinese soldiers can in these things hardly compare with them. These are the merits of the Xiongnu.”by Chao CuoThis was partially explained by Thomas of Split.“Their horses are short but sturdy, able to tolerate hunger and toil, and they ride upon them in the manner in which country people do. They race over rocks and stones like mountain goats, without the use of metal shoes. Even after being ridden for three days on end they are satisfied with a small meal of chaff.”The Xiongnu would had the same type of horse like the later Mongol.-“They (Mongols) are incomparable archers, and carry skins artificially made, in which they cross lakes and the most rapid rivers without danger.”from the letter of Frederick, Holy Roman Emperor-“What the King foresaw, happens: the Tatar/Ruthenian force is intending to cross the river in the Tatar way, which is for each man to hang on to his horse's tail as it swims across, but when they see that the far bank is full of armed men and cavalry and that the Poles are prepared to fight, they abandon the attempt.“from Annals of Jan DlugoszOne chronicle even said that there were no other people that swim better than the Mongols.“The Hungarian plain cannot support many Mongol forces with horse, without horse their advantage was lost”The usual estimation that the Hungarian Plain cannot support the large amount of Mongol horses was made by Sinor. He later revised the number and he had based the number from American horses, not Mongolian horses.From “Contextualizing the Mongol Invasion of Hungary in 1241–42: Short- and Long-Term Perspectives”József Laszlovszky, Stephen Pow, Beatrix F. Romhányi,László Ferenczi, Zsolt PinkeCorresponding author József LaszlovszkyCentral European University“Sinor, “Horse and Pasture,” 171–83. Sinor’s view was that the Great Hungarian Plain simply could not support the number of horses and other livestock which the Mongols would need to occupy Hungary. His 1972 estimation, based on American horse-breeding statistics and the assumption that each Mongol soldier required an average of three horses, was that the Great Hungarian Plain could not support a Mongol force larger than 68,640 troops. Decades later, Sinor had revised his calculations, estimating that Hungary could support 83,027 Mongol occupiers.”That is 249.081 American horses that the Mongol could support in the Hungarian plains. That’s more than enough horse to even equip Napoleonic Period cavalry numbers. That’s not taking into consideration that the Mongol horses were often described by European accounts as eating very little (eat only once in 3 days after being ridden) and they probably need a lot less food than modern American horses. But even with only 1 horse per Mongol soldier, they would already had a mobility advantage over any pre-modern European army.The Mongols had passed and fight in areas like thisKyzylkum DesertTian Shan mountainKara Khoto - capital of Xi XiaKazakhstanIt is illogical that the Mongol cannot support their horse in Europe, even if the horses need to eat tree leaves or dig grasses through the snow.GermanyFrance-“When fodder fails them, their (Mongol) horses are said to be satisfied with the bark and leaves of trees, and the roots of herbs, which the men bring to them; and yet, they always find them to be very swift and strong in a case of necessity.”from letter of Frederick, Holy Roman Emperor-Account of John of Plano Carpini in 1245 on Mongol horses when he was warned by the inhabitants of Kiev to not bring their European horse to the Steppe because“they (European horses) would all die, for the snow was deep and they would not know how to dig up grass from under the snow like the Tartar horses …”“European did not regard the Mongol as a threat, they were not afraid of the Mongol”Frederick, the Holy Roman Emperor, urged the European kingdoms with the other option of total destruction by the Mongol. European authors in Eastern Europe said that the emperor were actually trying to hide instead of fighting.“European already know of how the Mongols fought/there wasn’t anything new that the Mongol brought”The Mongol method of warfare in Europe was very limited compared to the one used in the Middle East and the methods used in the Middle East were far more limited than the one used in China.Not even the travel of Giovanni Pian del Carpine disclosed what the Mongols were fully capable of.Even the remnant of the enemies of the Mongol could destroy European forces. The remnant of the remnant of the Khwarezmian Empire pretty much destroy Crusader power in the Levant and slaughter or captured knights from the Templars, Hospitaller and Teutonic knights along with their masters.The Mongols had Khwarezmian auxiliaries working as far as China.“European were unified compared to the usual Mongol enemies, Mongols only win against fractured enemies, they never faced an enemy united like Europe”“European were too divided compared to the usual Mongol enemies, Mongols only win against centralized polities, they never faced a fractured polities like Europe”Both of these were often said and sometimes together in contradiction with each other.Hungary was very centralized compared to England and France, yet Hungary was defeated by the Mongol.Poland was fractured with different nobles holding their own land, yet Poland was defeated by the Mongol.Georgia was centralized, had knights and castles, yet they were defeated by the Mongol.The Russian principality was fractured compared to the earlier Kievan Rus, yet they were defeated by the Mongol.The rest of Europe was mostly in the fractured category, but in this sense being fractured is a weakness for the European side.Frederick, the Holy Roman Emperor, urged in his letter to the other European kingdoms to unite against the Mongol, yet his urging was met with suspicion that the Mongol was the agent of the Holy Roman Empire or that the emperor want to submit the other European kingdoms under his rule. The pope was also in conflict with the emperor.From Chronica Majora by Matthew Paris:The reaction of the king of France, when the letter of the Holy Roman Emperor about the Mongols was published:“We are, moreover, astonished, knoing the wisdom of the French, that you do not take more minute notice of the papal craft and avarice than all the others. For, in his insatiable ambition, he is now purposing to bring all Christian kingdoms into subjection to him, drawing an instance from his having trodden under-foot the crown of England ; and now he dares, with greater rashness and presumption, aspire to bend the majesty of the empire at his nod."Others didn’t believe what the emperor said:“The remarkable nature of this circumstance filled the whole of Europe with wonder, and spread even into the Saracen country ; and a difference of opinion arose amongst many, cliiferent people entertaining different thoughts on these matters.”“There were some who said that the emperor had, of his own accord, plotted this infliction of the Tartars, and that by this clever letter he basely cloaked his nefarious crime, and that in his grasping ambition he was, like Lucifer, or Antichrist, conspiring against the monarchy of the whole world, to the utter ruin of the Christian faith.”“Besides, they suspected that the secret plans, untraceable proceedings, and numerous plottings of these Tartars, were full of the imperial suggestions ; for they conceal their mode of speech, and vary their accoutrements and if any one of them is made a prisoner, by no means can information of their designs be extorted from the captive, by any torture, however severe, he may be put to.“European kingdoms and nobility continued to backstab each other, even in the midst of Mongol invasion and raids.Austrian invasion of Hungary in the first Mongol invasion from Roger of Apulia:“The duke, seeing that all the Hungarians had taken flight, collected a number of soldiers and sent them to Hungary against the Hungarians, so that while the Tatars were raging on the one side of the Danube, the Germans looted the other. They burned as many villages as they could, marched into the city of Győr, seized the castle and planned to hold it by force.”Polish infighting, just the next year after the Third Mongol Invasion of Poland from the Annals of Jan Dlugosz:“Leszek the Black, who has always disliked his cousin, Conrad of Mazovia, makes a second raid into the latter's territory, the first having been unsuccessful. In this the knights of Cracow and Sandomierz, exhausted by the recent fighting, refuse to take part, thus Matthew the Voivode of Sieradz is left to assemble what knights he can from his province, which suffered least at the hands of the Tatars, and lead them against Conrad. Conrad fails to put up any resistance, whether out of weakness or as a strategy, thus allowing the Voivode to ravage almost the whole of Mazovia.”