Which was the best army in ancient times?

While the aformentioned armies were formidable, it was the army led by Hannibal the great, that accomplished the greatest feats. How can the Roman army be the greatest? Hannibal and his army held the Roman Army, and Rome, at bay by defeating them routinely over a 15yr period. He never fought a battle against them when his army wasn't outnumbered. His army crossed the alps, with elephants, while losing over half his soldiers. After accomplishing this miraculous feat, they were still defeated the Roman Army.

Best Ancient Army

Here are some FAQ Farmers' opinions:

• The army of Alexander The Great was unquestionably the greatest army of the ancient world. His army of just over 40,000 men were never defeated. In 333 BC he defeated the Persian army of over 200,000 men under the leadership of Persian King Darius. He was revered by other great military leaders such as Julius Caesar.
  

• Roman Army, they almost conquered the known world.
• Spartan Army, they were the best trained warriors in ancient times.
• The Mongols, they took China completely, and quite a bit of Russia, Turkey and Europe.

Who can forget the Persian Army, conquering much of the eastern world?

The question is perhaps too rigid. One can say the Spartan army was perhaps the most well trained army in the ancient world; but whilst Athens controlled the sea they were unable to effectively use it. With regard to Hannibal, he was fighting foes who persued personal gain over good for the commonwealth until he met Scipio Aemilianus, who defeated him. With raw efficiency and unparralleld organisation, the Roman army was able to overpower virtually every enemy. However, because the Roman army spanned over such a long period of time, its dynamics changed a lot. Before Marius they were not professional, and were represented by the equestrian sects of society. During the time of Belasarius in Justinian's reign, they relied heavily on mercenaries from various backgrounds.

The Persian army certainly was not the greatest, as it relied heavily on its numbers. When fighting the Greeks at Marathan and Plataea they were beaten because of the structure of their Greek foes. Alexander was able to use the novel Macedonian phalanx to great effect, but was confronted by a bitterly divided society with decadent power.

Because climates and geographical surroundings influenced the Ancient armies more so than today, it is difficult to determine what the greatest army was, as when each army left their comfort zone they were considerably more vulnerable. Evidence of Carrhae (Rome against Parthia) in 53 and Plataea (Persia against Greek union) in 480(?) prove this.

The generalship of these armies were immensely important. In the grand battles, it was often the determining factor. Cyrus the Great, Brasidas in the Peloponnesian War, Alexander, Antiochus the Great, Hannibal, Scipio Aemilianus, Pompey the Great, Julius Caesar all showed military genius before the consolidation of Roman imperialism by Augustus.

The Eastern powers seemed to indulge in luxuries held in contempt by their western contemporaries, and did not dedicate themselves to strict military training. Cato's accusation that Pompey's eastern exploits were wars fought against women shows this.

The Romans and Greeks were far more patriotic than their eastern contemporaries. Given Athens' democratic nature, each citizen were willing to fight on until they were literally starving to death in the Peloponnesian War, and actually evacuated the city and onto their boats when Xerxes approached. The Persian 'hordes' were sent to their deaths out of fear from their masters, where the Greeks and Romans before the time of the Emporers fought for their commonwealth. Also, the Romans were professioanl soldiers and fought for cash and were therefore more motivated.

First answer by ID3357464802. Last edit by Beegee45. Contributor trust: 7 [recommend contributor]. Question popularity: 73 [recommend question]