how would the Mongols have fared in Europe against gunpowder?

so let's say (somehow, it doesn't matter how I don't think), gunpowder weapons become somewhat widespread in Europe (Hand cannons to be exact), enough so majority of the soldiers possess a gun and the knowledge to operate it. So in 1241 when the Mongols come knocking, they find themselves up against hand cannon-wielding Polish and German soldiers arrayed against them.


how would this impact Mongol conquests, and their campaigns against Europe?
 

Rockingham

Banned
so let's say (somehow, it doesn't matter how I don't think), gunpowder weapons become somewhat widespread in Europe (Hand cannons to be exact), enough so majority of the soldiers possess a gun and the knowledge to operate it. So in 1241 when the Mongols come knocking, they find themselves up against hand cannon-wielding Polish and German soldiers arrayed against them.


how would this impact Mongol conquests, and their campaigns against Europe?
They conquer about what they did OTL, but maybe don't vassalize Poland, and their other excursions into Europe, against Hungarian, German and Polish soldiers, are even greater failures, and cause greater casualties to the Mongols. The Golden Horde might not last as long, and the devestation to the Hungarian and Polish cultures isn't so great...therefore, the Germans don't settle throug has much of Eastern Europe.
 

Keenir

Banned
so let's say (somehow, it doesn't matter how I don't think), gunpowder weapons become somewhat widespread in Europe (Hand cannons to be exact), enough so majority of the soldiers possess a gun and the knowledge to operate it. So in 1241 when the Mongols come knocking, they find themselves up against hand cannon-wielding Polish and German soldiers arrayed against them.

given Mongol manuverabilty, and their ability to coopt technologies, I'd say things get worse for Europe -- the Mongols can now make deeper inroads into Europe, the Holy Land, and possibly India and Egypt.
 

Hendryk

Banned
China did have gunpowder and that didn't stop the Mongols.

Also, early firearms weren't such a dramatic improvement over the kind of composite bow that the Mongols used (see the Wikipedia entry). One would have to wait for the invention of rifled barrels for the gun to decisively outmatch the bow and arrow.
 
hand cannons aren't going to stop the Horde.... but cannons might... lots of them. Hand cannons are just too small and slow and not any better than the crossbows and bows around at the time. Firearms didn't really take off until the invention of the matchlock....

Cannons though... those could make a difference... but again, if it's the early crudest types, they won't...
 
Wasn't the first ever battle with guns used on both sides between the Mongols and the Chinese? And even though early hand cannons were incredibly inaccurate and ineffective at actually hitting anything, didn't they still scare the shitface out of horses?

Assuming that, Rockingham's figuring seems reasonable.
 
hand cannons aren't going to stop the Horde.... but cannons might... lots of them. Hand cannons are just too small and slow and not any better than the crossbows and bows around at the time. Firearms didn't really take off until the invention of the matchlock....

Cannons though... those could make a difference... but again, if it's the early crudest types, they won't...

I think this would make a difference only in the first battle that they're used, when the psychological impact might be great. After that, given the horrible rate of fire and enormous difficulty dragging the things around, the Mongols only need to make minute adjustments to their tactical system to render cannon irrelevant or a liability. They could help quite a bit in resisting sieges, though.
 
I recall reading somewhere that Mongol armies often used gunpowder themselves, and were actually some of the first people to begin using it in military applications following its invention in China.

I'll see if I can't locate the pertinent text.
 
It would depend on which era's guns. If you really mean pre-arquebus handgunnes that 15th century soldiers used... Nothing would change, except to give Mongols even bigger military advantage in the long run. Handgunnes were already formidable in the hands of generals and troops who were innovative and disciplined, so in the hands of someone like Subutai, ouch!
 
What if they were 16th century matchlock arquebus then? Along with 16th century cannon as well of course.
 
Yeah, but I just curious on how effective you thought Mongolian horse archers would actually be against such relatively 'advanced' weaponry. More of an idle question than one to think up a whole new scenario for. ;)
 

Rockingham

Banned
Yeah, but I just curious on how effective you thought Mongolian horse archers would actually be against such relatively 'advanced' weaponry. More of an idle question than one to think up a whole new scenario for. ;)
Frankly, they'd get smashed. The Mongol population, and thus army wasn't that large...they couldn't suffer high casualties to the same extent the relatively densely populated states of Europe could.
 
Yeah, but I just curious on how effective you thought Mongolian horse archers would actually be against such relatively 'advanced' weaponry. More of an idle question than one to think up a whole new scenario for. ;)

Depends. Are you positing the existence of the material firearms technology only or do OTL 16th-century tactics and logistics come with it? If the former, the Mongols aren't going to find it quite so easy to defeat their enemies, but they'll manage. If the latter, they're toast.
 
Top