|
|
Mongol Invasions: Battle of LiegnitzMilitary History | Single Page | 7 comments | Print This Post | Email This Post In February 1241, the Mongol army left its base in southern Russia and crossed the frozen rivers into central Europe. The force consisted of about 70,000 men, two-thirds of whom were light cavalry and the rest heavy cavalry, though all were equipped with bows. They were nominally commanded by Batu, but once again he was guided by Subotai. Even while campaigning in Russia, Subotai had been sending spies westward into central Europe to determine the political, economic and social conditions, as well as the military capabilities, of the kingdoms and duchies in that adjacent region. The results rewarded his efforts. Subscribe Today
Prior to embarking on the Hungarian campaign, the Mongols had defeated every major Russian principality that threatened their presence in that region, then spent a year resting and regrouping in what is now the Ukraine before crossing into central Europe. Although Batu and Subotai were aware of the divisive rivalries between the European kings and nobles, they also understood that the European rulers were closely related by blood and marriage, and would likely support each other if they thought an outside threat was serious enough. Therefore, the Mongol army was divided into two unequal forces. The smaller force, 20,000 men jointly commanded by Baidar and Kaidu, the grandson of Ogadei, started off first at the beginning of March 1241 and went north into Poland to draw off any support for Hungary that might be found there. The principal invasion force of about 50,000 men, commanded by Batu and Subotai, advanced a few days later and was itself broken into two contingents–the main body passed through the Carpathians into Hungary on March 12, while a small force to screen its southern flank, commanded by Kadan, son of Ogadei, passed through the Carpathians about 150 miles to the southeast and entered Transylvania. In 1241, Poland had been divided into four states, each ruled by a different branch of the Piastow family. While King Boleslav V of Kraków was legally the pre-eminent ruler, it was in fact his cousin, Duke Henry II of Silesia, who was the most powerful of the four lords. Whatever the niceties of the Piastows' arrangement, they proved incapable of offering a unified response to an incursion. Sweeping in a northward arc past the edge of the Carpathians and into Poland, Kaidu and Baidar sacked Sandomir, defeated an army of Poles and other Slavic forces under Boleslav at Kraków on March 3, and defeated another Polish army at Chmielnik on March 18. Turning their attention back to Kraków, the Mongols seized and burned the city on March 24, then assaulted the Silesian capital of Breslau a few days later. Breslau held out, and the Mongol commanders, knowing better than to embroil their small army in a long siege so deep in hostile territory, passed the city by and resumed their search for Duke Henry and his army. Unlike Henry, Kaidu and Baidar knew where Wenceslas was–only two days' march away. The Mongols were already somewhat outnumbered and could not risk allowing Henry and Wenceslas to join forces. Therefore, when Henry reached a plain surrounded by low hills not far from Liegnitz, called the Wahlstadt, or chosen place, he found the Tartars already there, waiting for him. Upon seeing the Tartars, Henry drew up his forces in four squadrons and placed one after the other on the Wahlstadt. The first group was made up of knights from various nations, supplemented by the miners from Goldberg under the command of Boleslav, son of the margrave of Moravia. Sulislav, the brother of the late palatine of Kraków, led the second group–Krakovians and knights from Welkopole. The third group consisted of knights from Opole, led by the Opolian Duke Meshko, and Teutonic Knights from Prussia under the Heermeister Poppo von Ostern. Duke Henry led the fourth group, which was made up of men at arms from Silesia and Breslau, knights from Welkopole and Silesia, and French Knights Templar. Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6Help HistoryNet by bookmarking to
            Tags: Ancient-Medieval, Historical Conflicts
 |
SPONSORED SITES
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||
What is HistoryNet?The HistoryNet.com is brought to you by the Weider History Group, the world's largest publisher of history magazines. HistoryNet.com contains daily features, photo galleries and over 5,000 articles originally published in our various magazines. If you are interested in a specific history subject, try searching our archives, you are bound to find something to pique your interest. |
From Our Magazines
|
Weider History Group |
Weider History Network: HistoryNet | Armchair General | Great History | Achtung Panzer! Copyright © 2010 Weider History Group. All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited. |
||
Loading ...
7 Comments to “Mongol Invasions: Battle of Liegnitz”
"On the very day that Henry and so many of his men had fallen, King Béla IV left Pest with an army of some 60,000Â70,000 fighting men to confront the larger Mongol force."
I believe your number is off here.
By Phil on Jul 22, 2008 at 9:31 pm
There are a lot of mistakes in the text. The true is: king Henry hte Pious lost the battle and Mongolians moved towards the Czech kingdom. King Wenceslau stopped them with his big army near Olomouc so that they didn`t go on to the central Europe and to the western Europe. They ran away to Hungaria.
By John on Aug 26, 2008 at 12:38 pm
The Mongols ultimately withdrew from Eastern Europe not because they loss any battle or because they were fearful, but because the great Khan Ogotai had died and a new Khan had to be elected
By Ken on Sep 8, 2008 at 6:33 pm
THIS MEDIEVAL "MISADVENTURE" SHOULD WAKE-UP ALL "WESTERNERS" OF EUROPEAN DESCENT FROM THE ILLUSION, THAT THE WEST WAS AND CONTINUES TO BE A SUPERIOR BASTION OF CULTURE AND MILITARY MIGHT THAT WAS NEVER IN DANGER FROM THE "DARK FORCES" OF WHAT WE CALL TODAY THE "THIRD-WORLD" .
THE TRUTH IS THAT EUROPE WAS ACTUALLY A SMALL PART OF THE WORLD THEN AND CONTINUES TO BE TODAY .
EVEN AFTER INDUSTRIALIZATION AND MODERNIZATION THE MAJORITY OF HUMANITY AND RESOURCES CONTINUES TO BE IN THAT PART OF THE WORLD OF "DARKNESS" .
EUROPEANS OF ALL KINDS SHOULD BE SEEKING UNITY AND BROTHERHOOD AND ADOPT "CLEAR THINKNG" OF WHERE THE DANGER IS ACTUALLY COMNG FROM.
By GUILLERMO GONZALEZ on Nov 24, 2008 at 1:42 am
As one of the 'Westeners' of European descent and present alliance of superiority:
I am fundamentally changed by reading this history. I used to base my grasp of the world on the history of the development of technology and democracy via the states formed since 1500 DC leading to trade, science and money as we know it. I believed in the continuous development story since year zero with Jesus and all that even though I am not religious.
After evaluating the Mongol conquest, this is changed forever as I think it ought to do for us all. By 1210, the world had in my mind, two superpowers; the Muslim and the Chinese. Both of them were incredibly conquered by the Mongols and one man.
I think they would have had no problem with overtaking Europe as well. England was invaded with 10000 soldiers 150 years before and the Spanish armada 250 years later, was not more than a few times bigger. The Mongols had already taken on armies of up to 400 000 several times and killed all without significant losses to themselves. They brought down almost ~80000 Russians and ~80000 Poles/Hungarians outnumbered one to 4 and with losses perhaps less than one to 40. A few years later, they had 150 000 soldiers in the area.
Western Europe had no idea what was going on and no relevant ability to stand up to it. The Catholic Church had over 1000 year of rule not only made Western Europe a ridicule of moral and wrongdoing wrt. investments and bad medicine. Its military capability was a joke compared to what was almost next door.
The western worlds conquest following this (after 1500 AC and until today) is not a result of its own ability, but a result of the power vacuum following Mongol conquest and decline (which the Mongols caused themselves). We have to view our self more as the mammal in the shape of a sort of rat, that crept out from hiding when the comet had killed all the dinosaurs 65 million years ago.
Just as the present world power, USA, has its power mainly as a result of not being seriously hit by WW2 and WW1, a large portion of the world powers of the last 500 years are the ones on the outside borders of Mongol conquest. (Turkey/Ottoman, Egypt, Russia, Western Europe, India, Japan, Siam, Vietnam).
A number of states more powerful than these, 'went out' of the history books forever.
I wish this history would be taken much more seriously. If we do not, we are just adding more lies regarding the basis of our power as the winner of the war can do. In this case, Western Europe is actually not even the winner, but the small, corner of little interest that was not overtaken due to other circumstances.
By Rune Voldsbekk on Jan 9, 2009 at 12:20 pm
this is such a kewl site!!!!!!!!!!
By froto on Feb 20, 2009 at 1:29 pm
One thing Mongol history has demonstrated is that the more astute general will take the victory. Weapons mean little if your generals don't know how to use them effectively. The Mongols have only lost a couple times in history, and never has it been because of technological advancement over their own, because they were smart enough to overcome most of that. The only reason why they lost were because: (1) the enemy was smarter than them (such as Vietnam, who were themselves actually outnumbered by the Mongols, so despite an advantage the Mongols lost 3 times to the Vietnamese back then), and (2) the enemy was damn lucky (Japan, the Mongols actually landed on Japan and were giving Japan a hard time, and so the Mongols, based on the assessment, decided to take it seriously and send a real force to take over Japan; however, a storm destroyed the boat the Mongols were sent in, and the Mongols simply had to withdraw).
By jam on Jul 30, 2009 at 1:03 am