Mongol Empire vs. Roman Empire - Page 2

Blademaster · 06-10-2006, 21:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gunnut

Yeah, but the cultural aspect is important also. Mongols had no culture. They have not made lasting impressions on this earth, other than body counts.

Wrong. The Golden Khanate. The Ottoman Turks. The Mughals.

gunnut · 06-10-2006, 22:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blademaster

Wrong. The Golden Khanate. The Ottoman Turks. The Mughals.

Are these the same nomadic people from Mongolia and Siberia? Or are they more like distant cousins who have settled centuries removed from their nomadic roots?

Blademaster · 06-11-2006, 00:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gunnut

Are these the same nomadic people from Mongolia and Siberia? Or are they more like distant cousins who have settled centuries removed from their nomadic roots?

They are the direct descendants of the invading Mongol hordes. They converted from nomadic tribes into settled people with traces of nomadic life.

sparten · 06-11-2006, 03:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blademaster

Wrong. The Golden Khanate. The Ottoman Turks. The Mughals.

The Golden Khanate, possibly. Not the other two. The Ottomons could be traced back to the Turks under Alp Arsalan, who crushed the Romans at Mazikert in 1074. And modern day Turks (or Ottomons for that matter) are merely the Turkified residents of Anatolia (and muslim Greeks).

The Mughals are a different matter altogerther, they claimed decent from Taimur trues, who himself claimed decent from Genghis Khan, which was a pretty dubious proposition. And people like Shah jahen and the Aurengzeb were more Indian (or possibly Afghan) both culturally, ethinically and biologically than they ever were Central Asian.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gunnut

How long did the Roman Empire last? Some say the American Empire today is the distant relative of Roman Empire. Where are the Mongols?

Depends on what you define by "Roman" and "Empire" and "last".
Looking at it calmly, I would say that the Roman Empire lasted until 698 AD, the all of Carthage to the Arabs, that was the last vestige of the old Latin Empire that Constantinople had.
Of Course the fall of Constantinople in 1453 can also be said to have the end of the Empire.

Maximus · 06-11-2006, 05:10 AM

The Roman Empire spanned two millenia(incl. the Eastern Roman Empire).

The Mongols reigned from 1206 AD to the 1350s. But it is also a fact that in that time they created the largest empire.

Romans usually had to fight wars against the invading armies of the various Barbarians, but in the case of Mongols, there was no empire or barbarians their to attack them.

The Cavalry Archers Mongols used were successful because the heavily armoured cavalry & infantry of Europe broke ranks to pursue the Archers.

Lightly armoured Mongol archers would be crushed against discplined Roman Infantry. Not to forget that Roman Infantry would be supported by seige, archers of their own and heavy cavalry, which would make it very difficult for the Mongols.

sparten · 06-11-2006, 09:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maximus

Lightly armoured Mongol archers would be crushed against discplined Roman Infantry. Not to forget that Roman Infantry would be supported by seige, archers of their own and heavy cavalry, which would make it very difficult for the Mongols.

Depends on the era. If its was circa 100~395 AD, then yeah sure. But after that, the Romans were pretty deficient in cavalry.

SRB · 06-11-2006, 18:10 PM

FACTS:
Monogol empire was largest empire in world.
It last short.
Mongols havent problem with climate, Romans had, this why they never go deep in East Europe.
Monogols get to Egypt.
Only in warfare Mongols were in front of Romans and in front of rest of world until mechanize armies, dont forget they were horseman army, faster than modern armies.

SRB · 06-11-2006, 18:13 PM

Monogols capture India, Alexandar didnt and Macedonian warfare is similar to Roman warfare, Romans copy them, because Romans copy all good things.

kNikS · 06-11-2006, 18:22 PM

Brate - Mongoli i mehanizovane armije!?

SRB · 06-11-2006, 18:46 PM

Speed of move.
If you read more about monogolian horse rider, each had 5+1 horses(one carring food and water) they can pass huge distances in short time and no need for fuel, repairs etc..
In many historian studies Monogolian horse army was fastest land army in history.
Panzers stop after 400 km in France. Also US tank core stop 400 km in Iraq waiting fuel.

sparten · 06-12-2006, 01:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SRB

FACTS:
Monogols get to Egypt.

They never got to Egypt. They were defeated at Ayn jalut (in palestine) in 1260, and then at Homs a few years later. They would be eventually pushed out of Mesopotamia.

And plese don't compare the Mongols with the Romans. Just look at how people remember the two. Romes Empire streched from (in their own words) "Britannia to Arabia". Even today, in all their former territories they are remembered with fondness. What do people remember about the Mongols. Lots of severed heads and raped women.

**Parihaka** · 06-12-2006, 03:48 AM

The Romans were professional soldiers, the Europeans at least during the time of the Mongol invasions were in the main peasants drafted for specific wars. The mere fact that they broke ranks to pursue the Mongols speaks volumes about their discipline. The Romans were organised on every level and co-ordinated within a single empire. The Mongols would've been toast.

sparten · 06-12-2006, 05:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by parihaka

The Romans were professional soldiers, the Europeans at least during the time of the Mongol invasions were in the main peasants drafted for specific wars. The mere fact that they broke ranks to pursue the Mongols speaks volumes about their discipline. The Romans were organised on every level and co-ordinated within a single empire. The Mongols would've been toast.

In Trajens time and for 3 centuries after, yeah sure.

gunnut · 06-12-2006, 13:28 PM

I think this is a bad question to ask who would win between the Mongols and the Romans. They were from 2 completely different eras. It's like asking who would win between Nazi's Wehrmacht and Napolean's army.

Better question is who had more influence on modern history. Roman Empire hands down, followed closely by the British Empire.

druik · 06-12-2006, 15:44 PM

The Romans DID manage to beat the Huns under their greatest leader during the waning years of the Western Empire. The Huns surely had similar tactics to the Mongols since they are both steppe peoples.

The Roman's greatest asset were that they were pretty flexible about changing their arms and armor depending on who they were fighting.

I'm confident they would've found a way to counter a mobile enemy like the Mongols.

View Poll Results: Who would be victorious?
Mongol Empire	60	56.07%
Roman Empire	47	43.93%
Voters: 107. You may not vote on this poll

06-11-2006, 05:10 AM	#20 (permalink)
Maximus OMGWTFPWNED! *Senior Contributor* Join Date: 10-31-04 Location: India Posts: 876 Country:	The Roman Empire spanned two millenia(incl. the Eastern Roman Empire). The Mongols reigned from 1206 AD to the 1350s. But it is also a fact that in that time they created the largest empire. Romans usually had to fight wars against the invading armies of the various Barbarians, but in the case of Mongols, there was no empire or barbarians their to attack them. The Cavalry Archers Mongols used were successful because the heavily armoured cavalry & infantry of Europe broke ranks to pursue the Archers. Lightly armoured Mongol archers would be crushed against discplined Roman Infantry. Not to forget that Roman Infantry would be supported by seige, archers of their own and heavy cavalry, which would make it very difficult for the Mongols. __________________ Self-control is the chief element in self-respect, and self-respect is the chief element in courage.

06-11-2006, 18:10 PM	#22 (permalink)
SRB Contributor Join Date: 05-19-06 Location: Belgrade Posts: 402 Country:	FACTS: Monogol empire was largest empire in world. It last short. Mongols havent problem with climate, Romans had, this why they never go deep in East Europe. Monogols get to Egypt. Only in warfare Mongols were in front of Romans and in front of rest of world until mechanize armies, dont forget they were horseman army, faster than modern armies. __________________ USSR EXPERIMENTAL SPITFIRE

06-11-2006, 18:22 PM	#24 (permalink)
kNikS *Senior Contributor* Join Date: 09-17-05 Location: Belgrade, Serbia Posts: 786 Country:	Brate - Mongoli i mehanizovane armije!? __________________ For King and Fatherland ~ Freedom or Death

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes	Rate This Thread
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode	Rate This Thread:

06-11-2006, 18:13 PM	#23 (permalink)
SRB Contributor Join Date: 05-19-06 Location: Belgrade Posts: 402 Country:	Monogols capture India, Alexandar didnt and Macedonian warfare is similar to Roman warfare, Romans copy them, because Romans copy all good things.

06-11-2006, 18:46 PM	#25 (permalink)
SRB Contributor Join Date: 05-19-06 Location: Belgrade Posts: 402 Country:	Speed of move. If you read more about monogolian horse rider, each had 5+1 horses(one carring food and water) they can pass huge distances in short time and no need for fuel, repairs etc.. In many historian studies Monogolian horse army was fastest land army in history. Panzers stop after 400 km in France. Also US tank core stop 400 km in Iraq waiting fuel.

06-12-2006, 03:48 AM	#27 (permalink)
Parihaka Moderator Join Date: 11-10-04 Location: Te Ika a Maui Posts: 9,023 Country:	The Romans were professional soldiers, the Europeans at least during the time of the Mongol invasions were in the main peasants drafted for specific wars. The mere fact that they broke ranks to pursue the Mongols speaks volumes about their discipline. The Romans were organised on every level and co-ordinated within a single empire. The Mongols would've been toast.

06-12-2006, 13:28 PM	#29 (permalink)
gunnut *Senior Contributor* Join Date: 01-27-06 Location: DPRK, Democratik People's Republik of Kalifornia Posts: 8,591 Country:	I think this is a bad question to ask who would win between the Mongols and the Romans. They were from 2 completely different eras. It's like asking who would win between Nazi's Wehrmacht and Napolean's army. Better question is who had more influence on modern history. Roman Empire hands down, followed closely by the British Empire.

06-12-2006, 15:44 PM	#30 (permalink)
druik New Member Join Date: 06-05-06 Posts: 5	The Romans DID manage to beat the Huns under their greatest leader during the waning years of the Western Empire. The Huns surely had similar tactics to the Mongols since they are both steppe peoples. The Roman's greatest asset were that they were pretty flexible about changing their arms and armor depending on who they were fighting. I'm confident they would've found a way to counter a mobile enemy like the Mongols.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Geographic Catalysts for Secularization in Western Europe	Ironduke	The Staff College	36	05-07-2007 03:57 AM
The Greatest Empire	scotsboyuk	General History	188	02-07-2007 16:16 PM
The Fall Of Rome?	Ironside	Ancient & Medieval	61	05-25-2006 21:47 PM
Destroying Baghdad	sparten	Warfare in the Modern Age	9	02-20-2006 16:22 PM
Are our Soldiers incompetent?	giggs88	The Western Alliance	104	12-28-2005 23:31 PM