>>40685
>If anything wouldn't that only go against your own argument?
Nope. European campaigns are literally what I wrote. Check 100 years of war for example (or any other wars). Their chief modus operandi was this.
>highly ironic
Not one bit.
>far more applicable to nomadic warfare
>loot the country side
You mean the poor ass peasants of medieval Europe? Their own lords did the same with them.
When steppe people moved their troops to foreigners lands they did that to follow the principle Sun Tzu also put to paper (and you can find it in his book): you don't feed your own army (which makes you poorer), take the food from the enemy.
And from my own quote:
>thugs
I wanted to incorporate this into the post(s) where I reply in earnest but.
The armies of steppe people rarely were ad hoc scraped thugs, like the medieval levy was. Learning horse archery in itself an art of a lifetime. I know a dude who does this for two decades now, I mean learning, he still not arrived to a point where he could call himself a horse archer. Talents like Kassai are rare, and even Kassai is a hack compared to what they were like. And then comes what matter the most - since they grew up on horseback with a bow in hands - they also had to learn how to fight in formations, stealing horses from the neighbour isn't comparable experience. They recruited the more talented and gave them training, they held mock battles regularly, and went fighting real ones according to the politics of the gens, tribe, tribal alliance or the khagan/khan/shan-yu himself. The warrior "class" served as followers of the heads of the social structure, bodyguards but also border guards. The states (they were real states with bureaucracy) of the steppe people kept a wide depopulated ring around their lands where they kept no settlements, but patrols who also used those lands as pastures (this is why their land toiling neighbours often did not know about their villages and towns).
Sima Qian gives a nice example of the training when he tells us that Mao-tun/Modu recruited ten thousand (= a tumen/tömény) men and trained them to follow all of his commands as they were one, to shoot their arrows where he shoots without a question. The story also tells more, many implications there, two for example: the discipline and obedience they demanded from the soldiers, and a hint how they directed fire with special arrowheads made to whistle during flight (it is confirmed from elsewhere). They trained them for maneuvers, and triggered their execution with signals. You cannot do this with part-time/ad hoc soldiers During the Wars of Roses after the old generation of Duke Richard the 3rd - who fought in the 100 years war - died out, they did not know how to conduct warfare properly, they were blundering greenhorns. Look it up..
Part of the so called Hungarian invasions one campaign rises above the others. They crossed the Alps, crossed the Po, crossed the Alps, crossed the Rhone, crossed the Pyrenees, beat the Moors, crossed the Pyrenees, crossed the Rhone, crossed the Rhine, and returned home along the Danube. They bargained diplomatic deals, fought some battles, many skirmishes, plundered towns and villages. The did this with 15 thousand men, and 50-100 thousands of horses. It was an organized campaign which makes Hannibal a clueless beginner. I leave you the homework to look it up, feel free to loan books from libraries and such, it can be done via the internet from far away institutions too.