All of these were at one point beaten by the Romans. I'm not sure what you mean here.Probably not. They couldn't handle Turks, Venetians, Bulgars, or Frankish freelancers. Mongols dont' seem especially worse than those guys.
All of these were at one point beaten by the Romans. I'm not sure what you mean here.
A ship can be top of the line but if it crashes that's due to the captain.I can't help but compare a map of Byzantium in 1000 AD to 1200 AD and note that the Empire looks like it gets beaten by everyone of its neighbors.
Yes. Have the Comnenian Restoration restore Basil's Empire, or prevent Manzikert in the first place. Then have a competent emperor in charge. Although a competent emperor is more likely to just pay the Mongols off instead of fight them.
.
some points, cant vassalize venice due to lagoon tribute and nominal overlordship at best. As for otl incidents Nogai's invasion of the balkans, he defeated the romans and avaged thrace, in return the emperor paid him off with lots of money and a wife.I would like to see evidence of the Mongols of the 13th C. being bought off by any polity of importance. Certainly the Byzantines could acknowledge the overlordship of the Great Khan and have vassel status, supplying troops, supplies, and monies in lieu of potential destruction. If the Mongols, at the height of their power had you in their sights, you submitted or they fought you until you were defeated.
I don't see the armies of the Empire at its greatest military might and sophistication (say under Basil II) as being as formidable or as well led as Mongol tumens under its best generals in the open field.
The question would remain of the Mongol ability to beseige and storm Constantinople. The Mongols have the engineering skill ( thanks to Chinese and Arab specialists) but they'd have to muster a navy. Of course, if the Byzantines are under this amount of the loving caresses of the Mongols attentions, probably other polities in the West have already bowed or been destroyed. Imagine the Mongols with a vassel Venice...![]()
some points, cant vassalize venice due to lagoon tribute and nominal overlordship at best. As for otl incidents Nogai's invasion of the balkans, he defeated the romans and avaged thrace, in return the emperor paid him off with lots of money and a wife.
I don't see the armies of the Empire at its greatest military might and sophistication (say under Basil II) as being as formidable or as well led as Mongol tumens under its best generals in the open field.
I think any pod the strengths the Romans makes the mongols unlikely the occur. We forget they steppe tribes being united isn't a historical absolute.
Maybe not, but I have major doubts that the rise of Genghis Khan would have been prevented by improvements in the position of an empire half a world away. I have two words: butterfly nets.
Bufferfly nets are literary device designed to create a recognizable setting when it's given that in reality such a thing could not occur.
You may not see it, but it's there. I've always read of the Byzantine military, during its better moments, as being a thoroughly professional force capable of comprehending and implementing fairly sophisticated tactics and strategies. They were already very familiar with the Mongol tactic of feigned retreat, for instance, and were more than capable of recognizing it and maintaining coherence against it.
A mid-13th century Byzantium that has retaken Anatolia and has the luck of a good Emperor at the right time is actually very well suited to face down the Mongols. Then it becomes a question of whether or not the Mongols are willing and able to engage in a Song-style conquest-slot across the peninsula.
On the other hand, the Mongols are more than capable of rolling right through a Byzantium that is unprepared and under bad leadership.
So yeah, it's plausible. Not by any means definite, but plausible.
I can only see this if the Sassanians can curb the Arabs, or if the PODs big-world-changing-event happens before 700.
Keep in mind the Mongols invaded both Indonesia and Japan by sea.