Rome v the Monguls?

Do the Romans win or the Monguls

  • Romans win

    Votes: 22 48.9%
  • Monguls win

    Votes: 22 48.9%
  • Draw

    Votes: 1 2.2%

  • Total voters
    45
  • Poll closed .
Find it difficult to conceive of Roman armies advancing on Mongol territory, so would think it would have to be Mongol invasion of Roman Europe.

Roman generals lured out into plains would get the Carrhae treatment. Roman generals who kept their wits would keep the terrain to nullify Mongol calvary tactics and keep their discipline (lots of testudo). If they're smart, they'll bring along plenty of auxiliary cavalry and make liberal use of greek fire to frighten the horses. Mongols ever go against elephant cavalry?

Mongol scorched earth tactics would be less effective since Rome would be used them and I doubt the Romans would succumb as easily to Mongol siege tactics. Assuming we can somehow compensate for the time/technology development.

If we want Europeans invading Mongol territory, maybe make it Alexander/Macedonians with their phalanx and sarissa

Romans facing the Mongols would be fighting 1,000 years later, and would have had experience with a very large number of similar nomadic irruptions, including the Huns, Avars, etc. This would have caused their military organization to change.

Which is what happened in OTL. We call it the "Byzantine Army" (everyone forgets the Byzantines :mad:), which, provided it was in good health, would have been plenty a match for the Mongols.

Romanos Diogenes took on the Seljuk army with a degraded version of this force, and it was a close battle. If it had been the army during Basil II's reign, the Seljuks, and by extension the Mongols, would have been toast.
 
If it had been the army during Basil II's reign, the Seljuks, and by extension the Mongols, would have been toast.

That's a big assumption. The Seljuks even at their best were never as good as the Mongols, and the Mongols dealt with Byzantine-style armies with some success. Steppe tactics don't stay static either. More tellingly, Byzantine ability to hold on to the Steppes was close to zero, as history attests.

Granted, if there was any "Romans" that could do it, that would have been it, but even then, Basil would have never invaded the Mongol Empire. It just makes no sense.
 
Romans have no chance.

The Mongols were great fighters on the steppe and across the central european fields would be fine. But they also shone as siege winners. They could draw on the expertise of a continent and would be eager to employ any romans that could help them.

I think the romans would also be vulnerable to psychological warfare aspect of the Mongols.
 
That's a big assumption. The Seljuks even at their best were never as good as the Mongols, and the Mongols dealt with Byzantine-style armies with some success. Steppe tactics don't stay static either. More tellingly, Byzantine ability to hold on to the Steppes was close to zero, as history attests.

Granted, if there was any "Romans" that could do it, that would have been it, but even then, Basil would have never invaded the Mongol Empire. It just makes no sense.

Why would the Byzantines invade the Mongol Empire? That was never even on the table. History does not attest to Byzantine inability to hold onto the steps because they never attempted it, never considered it, nor ever had the slightest reason to. And I don't see how the Seljuks at their best were not as good as the Mongols, or at least nearly - they were nearly contemporary and had militaries of similar composition. Similar armies in the hands of the Mamelukes turned the Mongols back.
 
Why would the Byzantines invade the Mongol Empire?

I thought that was the original premise, or someone said so in the thread.

And I don't see how the Seljuks at their best were not as good as the Mongols, or at least nearly - they were nearly contemporary and had militaries of similar composition. Similar armies in the hands of the Mamelukes turned the Mongols back.
Well, considering how easily the Mongols dealt with all contemporary Steppe Turcs and other, more sedentary cavalry nations, I'd give them a slight edge.

However, in a hypothetical Basil vs. Subotai, a lot would depend on intelligence and motivation. The Mongols with the exception of one brief period have minimal interest in dealing with Roman fortifications in return for little gain, so unless the conditions on both sides are perfect, there may never be a war beyond some continuous skirmishing and raiding.

If a battle were to happen, it would really depend on where it happens. If it's somewhere far from good pasture and water sources, and the Mongol army is without reinforcements (like at Ain Jalut), things might go the Roman way. The reverse would be likely in Bessarabia.
 
I thought that was the original premise, or someone said so in the thread.

Well, considering how easily the Mongols dealt with all contemporary Steppe Turcs and other, more sedentary cavalry nations, I'd give them a slight edge.

However, in a hypothetical Basil vs. Subotai, a lot would depend on intelligence and motivation. The Mongols with the exception of one brief period have minimal interest in dealing with Roman fortifications in return for little gain, so unless the conditions on both sides are perfect, there may never be a war beyond some continuous skirmishing and raiding.

If a battle were to happen, it would really depend on where it happens. If it's somewhere far from good pasture and water sources, and the Mongol army is without reinforcements (like at Ain Jalut), things might go the Roman way. The reverse would be likely in Bessarabia.

Oh, sorry, I see that someone down the line thought the Byzantines would be attacking. If they did, they'd lose. A Byzantine army can't operate so far from supply. Mongols bring theirs with them in the form of spare mounts.

Regarding the "steppe Turks", the Mongol army was composed almost entirely of them, and they weren't "easily dealt with", they willingly joined - to oversimplify, it was "What should we do this weekend? I don't know, raid Manchuria? No, wait, let's conquer the whole fucking world! Fuck, yeah, I'm going with him!" There's no real difference between them in tactics.

The Mongols had the benefit of having conquered China - Chinese head on Mongol body - but then a Persian head is not so bad either.

Eastern Anatolia is the zone of conflict. Control over this area means control over the Middle East. While I agree that there isn't really much reason for the two powers to fight, this is a hypothetical.

If the Mongols decided to go after the Empire, most likely the Byzantines would pay them a bunch of money to go away, and the Mongols would call it a day.

But that's not really what the OP meant. If the Mongols refused the money, assuming the riches of Constantinople were the ultimate prize, the battle is on the frontier, and the Mongols lose, provided a competent Byzantine general is present. Even in plains, I would give the Byzantines the victory, so long as they were in supply. Their army was designed to fight steppe-nomads. If the Mongols are prepared to pay an enormous price for meager gains, they can wear down the Byzantines through numbers, but their manpower is not inexhaustible.
 
If the Mongols decided to go after the Empire, most likely the Byzantines would pay them a bunch of money to go away, and the Mongols would call it a day.

But that's not really what the OP meant. If the Mongols refused the money, assuming the riches of Constantinople were the ultimate prize, the battle is on the frontier, and the Mongols lose, provided a competent Byzantine general is present. Even in plains, I would give the Byzantines the victory, so long as they were in supply. Their army was designed to fight steppe-nomads. If the Mongols are prepared to pay an enormous price for meager gains, they can wear down the Byzantines through numbers, but their manpower is not inexhaustible.
In regards to that, the Mongol's did see the Byzantine Empire, and by accounts that I've come across, took one look at Constantinople and decided to invade somewhere else. Not to mention that in order to successfully assault Constantinople, it's not just siege warfare you need, it's a Navy too.
 
Top