If Subetai's conquest of Europe had continued:

Oct 2015
1,195
California
The European campaign was led by one of the greatest military commanders in history, Subutai. If we were to just go by his record alone, it can be argued he was perhaps the greatest military commander ever:

  • 20 Military Campaigns (Often across multiple nations)
  • 32 Nations Defeated
  • 65 Pitched Battles Won (often against forces double or more his force’s size)
  • Conquered More Territory Than Any Military Leader in History
(The Greatest Military Commander You've Never Heard Of | IW Blog )

Adding to that he did what no one has ever suceeded in doing since, he conquered Russia.

Assuming that Ögedei Khan doesn't die prematurely, and Subetai continues to press further in Europe Sebetai presses on, and After defeating the Hungarian, Polish and German armies at Mohi and Liegnitz Subetai sweeps across Europe, successfully establishing some sort of "European khanate". In Russia, the Mongol empire there was known as the Golden Horde. What would the European khanate be known as?


Subetai.jpg


I can imagine some European cities freely surrendering to spare themselves the brutal aftermath of a Mongol siege, (the wholesale extermination of the populace, mountains of skulls piled up.

In Spain, the Mongol conquest may speed up the Christian reconquest there. An alliance of convenience between the Mongols and the Christian kingdoms of Castille, and Aragon may have some short term mutual benefits concerning a common enemy, but the Christian kingdoms there would in effect just be trading one overlord for a new one.

The European khanate encompasses Germany, Austria, Switzerland, France, Italy, Slovenia, Croatia, Bohemia-Moravia, Slovakia, Pomerania,Hungary, Poland, the Iberian Peninsula. To the north the khanate encompasses Denmark, but the rest of Scandinavia, Sicily, England, and Ireland are the only remaining regions of Europe left unconquered.

So what would be the European khanate's effect on politics, religion, culture, and economy?

Politics

If Mongol rule in Russia is anything to go by, the Mongols seemed to have practiced a laissez faire approach to ruling. For the most part they left the native princes in Russia rule on their behalf as long as they paid tribute.

In China, Mongol rule was somewhat different, installing their own dynasty on the Chinese throne known as the Yuan Dynasty. Europe on the other hand is not a single centralized state like China.

Will this European khanate adopt a more oriental style of bureaucratic absolutism? difficult to do since Europe doesn't have a centralized government which the new Mongol overlords could work with and retain European bureaucrats, tax collectors and civil servants like they did in China. They could perhaps establish a single unified central government however, but would they have?

Religion

Some Mongols were actually Christians, not Roman Catholics, but Nestorian Christians. For more info on Nestorian Christianity: Nestorian Christianity - New World Encyclopedia

Will the reigning khans of this european khanate convert to Roman Catholicism? In otl, The Yuan Dynasty rulers in China beginning with Kublai Khan converted to Tibetan Buddism. In Russia, the Golden Horde converted to Islam during the 14th century thereby strengthening the Russian resolve to throw off its Mongol bondage turning reconquest into a Crusade between Christianity and Islam.

So what would happen if the European khanate converted to Roman Catholicism?

Culture:
It would be interesting to see the kind of linguistic results of a European khanate. Would we see some significant loan words between Mongol and European languages?

How about technological development? The Mongols made use of the technology of the nations they conquered, I would assume they would have done the same in Europe, but considering that Europe had few major centers of learning at least compared to, say, Persia or China, Europe would probably be one of the least technologically advanced regions they conquer, unless they conquered Al-Andalus.

Economy

In general wherever the Mongols conquered, those regions were opened up to a vast trading network. We could see a drastic change in European involvement in the silk road.

In Russia, however the result of the Mongol conquest was largely destructive leaving a lasting negative impact, cutting off an already isolated Russia even further from the outside world.Would it be the same in the European khanate?

How long would the European khanate last? What would be its long term impact?

Some possibilities: as in Russia, the impact of the Mongol conquest in Europe may result in a similar way in which European princes, kings, and dukes who are Mongol vassals may become just as despotic as the Russians in their desire to centralize their control minimizing the limitations placed on them by their own vassals, and the Church. Think of Henry II and Thomas Becket's feud over this issue magnified ten-fold as ever increasing despotic European kings try to exercise complete control and the Church being just as equally uncompromising.

The defeat of the European armies may force them to change their tactics and organization, perhaps putting more value on mounted archers within European armies.
 
Last edited:

deaf tuner

Ad Honoris
Oct 2013
14,533
Europix
The defeat of the European armies may force them to change their tactics and organization, perhaps putting more value on mounted archers within European armies.
Very unlikely.

The second Mongol invasion of Hungary ended in an utter defeat (one cronicle say that Nogai returned with one wife and a couple of horses left from his army ... ), a defeat achieved by European styled armies.

Generally speaking, for answering Your ifs, I believe the first thing would be to look what had really happened in an extremely similar case: Hungarians. They were steppe wariors like Mongols, but unlike Mongols, they did installed permanently in Europe, in the place Mongols didn't managed to (Panonian plane, that is).
 
Mar 2016
1,222
Australia
20 Military Campaigns (Often across multiple nations)
A single war can have multiple campaigns, so this number isn't quite as impressive as I'm sure it was intended to sound.

32 Nations Defeated
Define "nations". In the early-to-mid 13th century the concept of a "nation" did not exist, and much of what the Mongols conquered outside of China and Persia were tribal confederations and petty kingdoms, some being very small.

65 Pitched Battles Won (often against forces double or more his force’s size)
Again, I'm going to need more specificity when it comes to defining what a "pitched battle" is in this context. Because many of those 35 would probably be skirmishes, as is always the case. The medieval era was not an era of as many pitched battles as earlier and later eras, especially not in the steppes and the Russian region.

Conquered More Territory Than Any Military Leader in History
The vast majority of that territory was sparsely populated, if populated at all. The conquests of China and Persia were more impressive because of the relative level of sophistication and the much higher populations present in those regions compared to Russia and the Caucasus. Also, I'm fairly confident that men like Cyrus, Alexander and Genghis conquered more territory than Subetai did.

But anyway, a Mongol conquest of Europe would not have been possible, for two major reasons: firstly, the Mongols were not experts in siege warfare, and Central and Western Europe were dominated by thousands of modern castles and fortifications. This would dramatically slow down the Mongol advance and leave their armies vulnerable to the inevitable attrition that affected besieging armies. Secondly, the terrain and environment was not as suitable for the Mongols as China and the steppes were, since Central and Western Europe were heavily forested in this era, reducing both the maneuverability of the Mongol cavalry as well as the grass necessary to feed their many horses (each Mongol warrior generally travelled with at least three horses). And as deaf tuner explained, the Mongols were decisively beaten by the Hungarians (and also the Polish) when they returned for a more permanent conquest later in the century, through a combination of strong defensive fortifications and massing heavy cavalry (which on a man-to-man basis was superior in fighting ability and strength to the Mongol cavalry). Any speculations of the Mongols somehow conquering Central and Western Europe are pure fantasy and not borne out by any solid evidence.
 
Oct 2015
1,195
California
The second Mongol conquest of Hungary is a moot point since they have already had time to reform their army. This conquest would have occurred before that. The original intent of Subutai's foray into Hungary was a punitive raid against King Bela who had given refuge to the Cumans. Any future Mongol campaigns further west beyong Hungary would have been meet French and German armies in pitched field battles, defeating them and the Mongols sacking some German cities (Lubeck, etc.).

I" think the Mongols would have settled into Hungary while levying tribute from German and Polish principalities. Eventually in about a century or two the Mongols will be overthrown. The main point of this scenario is how this Europe develops as a result of a longer term Mongol presence.

Anyway, when they first started out, the Mongol's knowledge of siege engineering were lacking. However by the time of Subutai, the mongols at this stage are now masters of seige craft. They would have no doubt either Chinese or Persian engineers in hand to break the castle walls. Subutai may not have taken some with him during his foray into Hungary, as that was only a scouting mission. Without the death of Ogedai the Mongols probably would have stayed in Eastern Europe, and await reinforcements and allow time of the construction of siege engines. While part of their forces are laying siege to cities, others will conduct raids along the country side to further isolate the cities.

Every seems to forget that The terrain in China (mountains, rivers, hills and its fortified cities) didn't stop the Mongols, neither did the 5 million men Chinese infantery army, and its more organized centralized state. S why on earth would a fragmented feudal Europe be able to? And remember, at his point, they were master of siege, there had probably never before been a civilization that mastered that art so succefully. The conquest of Europe would have been difficult, One issue I see with a permenent conquest of Europe is one of tactical mobility problems.

you need a lot of grassy plain type areas to breed and maintain a horse-based nomadic army over long periods. When the Mongols came to eastern Europe, they weren't going all-out to conquer Europe only to be turned back by a succession crisis. For them, Europe was verging on the ass end of nowhere. It's geographically disconnected from the main Eurasian steppe regions where they had the best mobility and the best environment for their horses. Logistically, it wasn't easy for them to mount operations into Europe, and even the parts that they did conquer were pretty far off from the main Mongol empire.