Europeans defeated to many steppe armies in medieval times: Charlemagne vs Avars, germans vs magyars and crusaders vs turks. About Crusades: europeans suffer very few defeats against turks (1101 and perhaps small battles in Holy Land), but europeans won all the battles of the First Crusades and then resist for 100 years with a ridiculous number of men, across several wars and battles agaist enemies many more numerous. Only when muslim had well equiped armies could win. Oh you forget the Third Crusade: Frederick crushed to turks in Anatolia, english and french took Acre and then Richard won a great battle in Arsuf. Yes, the II, V, VII and VIII were disastrous; but not the crusade of 1212 in Spain. More, when Pope say "Crusade" any christian could fight against other christian that was going to crusade.
About fortress: ummm, russians had wood fortress, muslims copied the fortress from the christians, only chinese could make best fortress. Hungary and Poland don't had many fortress, but all the cities of western Europe had walls and citadels, when mongols attacked look at Breslau. Colonia, Miln had fortress very powerful, for example. And the country had many casttles since Austria to Normandy.
About siege weapons: mongols come to Europe with a few siege weapons, but for took a city like Paris they need many more and Infantry, for close combat. Where was that infantry?. In China, they used chinese from North, because Song China don't help to Jin empire and then Mongols had a near infantrymen base; in Middle East, the muslims was not united, when mongols attack X place, the muslims of other X place don't help their.
In Europe, the mongols couldn't had a large number of infantrymen, from where? If europeans see that mongols want established into catholic Hungary, for example, surelly they will attack to mongols (example, Spain). We must think that Batu perhaps leaved Hungary by logistical difficults.
Holy Roman Empire was in crisis at 1241, because their emperor was excomulgated. But, like Liegnitz many lords could be allied and if Pope say "against Mongols" he could give to Emperor all his powers; french and italian will go to Germany. You must remember that then Liegnitz and Mohi, Germans was prepariying against mongols.
It is a what if, of course. What do history say us? That mongols defeated to hungarians and a weak army from Germany, and then, never ever try again. They try again: in China, Egypt, Burma, Japan, China, Annam, Cambodia... not Europe. That is a fact.
Europe had 75 millions of persons, a inmense number of fortress, a military tradition of cavalry (heavy and light) and infantry (spears, archers, crossbow, swordsmen...) Europeans won to steppe warriors (turks, magyars, avars...) because these peoples can't assault their cities, and then the europeans knew the way of defeat to nomads; or broke european formations (example Dorilea, First Crusade). In Europe, Mongols could't found allies with infantry and siege weapons, because europeans was christians and i doubt that anybody help to pagans... We must remember that XIII century was a religious time; so europeans could send very powerful Crusades against mongols. We must count with the ideology.
The situation: A mongol army in German forests, without food because it is into the casttle, without infantry or siege weapons, and the europeans attacking to mongols: first, french chevaliers and german cavalry (with infantry of course), then english bowmen and their cavalry, italian urban infatrymen with spears and crossbow, spanish with cavalry and light infantry... two posibilites: return to steppe or die.
Many people say "they was indisciplined", that is a myth, when europeans was well commanded (First Crusade, Third Crusade, Navas de Tolosa...) they was excellent warriors. I think that, yes, europeans couldn't conquer the steppe or Far East, but the mongols couldn't conquer Europe.
that's completely bullsh*t. first, Mongols and subsequent Ottomans defeated your disciplined Europeans several times, teh European style of warfare was simply inferior. second, Mongols had the best siege record in history by far, even bevor adopting siege engines, due to tricks and innovativeness (just look at the sieges of the Xi Xia capital or the Jin capital. second, europe had many fortresses maybe, but not a single one that the Mongols couldn't crack with ease, in fact Europe had the least sophisticated fortification methods of the time. third, at the time of the Mongol invasion of Bat, central europe was at conflict with itself, there was no one that could have stood up agaisnt the Mongols anyways. where should all those knights and infantrymen you talked about come from? and except for the first crusade no European crusader army was able to defeat a Steppe army. and at the first crusade there were simply too mayn people to be killed, that's why they succeeded, not due to some fancy non-existing tactic. therefore we can exclude any thread from Crusades...
Song Empire don't had cavalry, the mongol fighted horrible battles with chinese yes but, repeat, Song don't had important cavalry and their wonderful empire were defeated. Jin had cavalry and the mongols suffered thirty years of war; the Jin empire had a population of 10 millions of persons, the North of China was very poor.
Europe had 75 millions of persons, a inmense number of fortress, a military tradition of cavalry (heavy and light) and infantry (spears, archers, crossbow, swordsmen...) Europeans won to steppe warriors (turks, magyars, avars...) because these peoples can't assault their cities, and then the europeans knew the way of defeat to nomads; or broke european formations (example Dorilea, First Crusade). In Europe, Mongols could't found allies with infantry and siege weapons, because europeans was christians and i doubt that anybody help to pagans... We must remember that XIII century was a religious time; so europeans could send very powerful Crusades against mongols. We must count with the ideology.
The situation: A mongol army in German forests, without food because it is into the casttle, without infantry or siege weapons, and the europeans attacking to mongols: first, french chevaliers and german cavalry (with infantry of course), then english bowmen and their cavalry, italian urban infatrymen with spears and crossbow, spanish with cavalry and light infantry... two posibilites: return to steppe or die.
Many people say "they was indisciplined", that is a myth, when europeans was well commanded (First Crusade, Third Crusade, Navas de Tolosa...) they was excellent warriors. I think that, yes, europeans couldn't conquer the steppe or Far East, but the mongols couldn't conquer Europe.
PD. We can exclude to indians, they was not rivals for muslim cavalry...
So the Europeans underestimated the mongols. Really badly. Horribly, really.
Number accounts are unreliable though. Many Europeans recorded their numbers as much greater as they thought because
1) They were very very mobile and organised, beyond anything they
had ever experienced. So they assumed "Hmmm, another horde must have
been hiding here!
2) They were embarassed. Everyone makes excuses for losing.
"Storm From the East" is a good book to read about Mongols with a good focus on the European Theatre.
Really, the Europeans thought the mongols were better than them.
You don't get called "Hammer of God" by the Pope for nothing.
[/QUOTE]
This summarizes it right. Most embarrassing is that Mongols did not
have to try very hard. Liegnitz was just diversion from Mongol point of
view, Hungarian Mongol campaign made European strategy at Liegnitz look
like rocket science.
What is fun, after these battles, Europe has no army according to the letter of one of observers to the French king.
Europeans without firearms and
cannons never manage to carve out empire larger than 3.3 to
3.5 milions square miles. Largest European empire before
industrial revolution was Holy Roman empire which was around 3.3 to 3.5
milions square miles while Roman empire with vassal was around 2.4
milions square miles and Alexander's empire was only 2.1 milion square
miles. The rest were just many small kingdoms.
Could we check the sizes of these European empires. I am looking at the
period map and Holly Roman Empire seem to be much smaller than that.
Charlemagne had a bit bigger empire, but still not that big.
I can translate it after Dec 21 when my finals are over.
"Therefore, whatever you want men to do to you, do also to them"
"Not what goes into the mouth that defiles the Man, but what comes out of the mouth" Matthew 7:12, 15:11
The article is about how the Chinese completely annihilates Alexander's army. Fin.
"Therefore, whatever you want men to do to you, do also to them"
"Not what goes into the mouth that defiles the Man, but what comes out of the mouth" Matthew 7:12, 15:11
"You mean, "simplified". And like 85% of your article is composed of simplified version."
What are you talking about? You are not making sense.
Both Big 2 and GB are codes. Both of them can turn the characters into both simplified and traditional Chinese.
Another nonsense
Damn, I know its that NJ translating machine you are referring to (note that not many people have it anyway). The real nonsense is that nobody except you chinese people can read those articles. So it's you who's talking gibberish- and making no sense. Please translate you post in the standard language (Hint: English) before posting one of these. Thanx.
We have no clothes, thus we share our robes. Our king raises the army, and fixes my spear, and thus our hate is singular.
We have clothes, thus we share our shirts. Our king raises the army, and fixes my halberd, and thus our actions are singular.
We have no clothes, thus we share our capes. Our king raises the army, and fixes my armor and weapons, and marches with us.
We have no clothes, yet we are close and love each other. Our king raises the army and fixes my bow and crossbow, and our goals are singular. (Forgive the bad translation)
~{NR35~{KD;F~{OtOtBmCy#,SFSFl7l:~}.~{M=Sy2;>*#,4sbR2;S/~} ~{V.WSSZUw#,SPNEN^Iy~}.~{TJRS>}WS#,U9SP4s3I~}. My chariot charges forth, my horses charges with me, the 4 great steeds charges east.
The 4 steeds charges forth, the 2 wheels charge straight, the gait is not lost, the released arrows pierces true.
The horses neigh, the banners flutter, the horses fear naught, the greed is unsatisfied.
To campaign for the king, we are heard yet we speak not, so that our men will do their great deeds. (forgive me again for the very very bad translation)
"Therefore, whatever you want men to do to you, do also to them"
"Not what goes into the mouth that defiles the Man, but what comes out of the mouth" Matthew 7:12, 15:11
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum