I am currently reading about Atilla. He seemed to have success in Europe using what I believe to be similar tactics in battle to the Mongolians - mounted archers, fast paced cavalry etc.
So I am wondering why the Mongols did not advance further into Europe. Apart from the huge distance from their homelands, one other explanation I've heard is that there wasn't enough land for pasture in Europe to sustain the huge retinue of horses the Mongol armies took to war. Is it simply the distance and difficulty in sustaining the army that prevented them advancing in Europe, or is there more to it?
Hey there,
Just to let you know, your question is fine, and we're letting it stand. However, you should be aware that questions framed as 'Why didn't X do Y' relatively often don't get an answer that meets our standards (in our experience as moderators). There are a few reasons for this. Firstly, it often can be difficult to prove the counterfactual: historians know much more about what happened than what might have happened. Secondly, 'why didn't X do Y' questions are sometimes phrased in an ahistorical way. It's worth remembering that people in the past couldn't see into the future, and they generally didn't have all the information we now have about their situations; things that look obvious now didn't necessarily look that way at the time.
If you end up not getting a response after a day or two, consider asking a new question focusing instead on why what happened did happen (rather than why what didn't happen didn't happen) - this kind of question is more likely to get a response in our experience. Hope this helps!