Archery in Classical Warfare

[Sean Manning]

"A substantial ancient army after the period of city states was at least 20,000 strong. A substantial medieval army was around 10,000 strong. (Great medieval armies could be as large as great ancient ones, perhaps up to 60-70,000 combatants, but great armies are rare). We've debated this before, and you aren't going to convince me until I see your research"

I am not sure what you mean here, because I would subscribe those figures, provided that those "great armies" are formed by the conjunction of 2 or more field armies for a battle.

OK, then we are agreed. I was reacting to your comment "ancient armies were not that large", which seemed to disagree with me, and feeling a bit defensive. I think we are agreed about more than we disagree (especially that "Amateurs talk tactics, professionals talk logistics"), but it seems we have a hard time not squabbling about details.

A great Roman army would be a combination of several field armies, I agree. Other great armies might be raised by a coalition (Alexander's war with Persia, the largest Crusades before hunger/disease/poverty/exhaustion took their toll) or in an all-out effort by a great warrior king- either would have the same effect of creating an army too large to sustain for long.