Name your favorite Ancient War army or legend

in this, you have to just say which army you prefered the best back in ancient warfare, and you can also say who your favorite fighter/hero is

I personally find achilles to be one of the greatest fighters in the world, but for army, i would have to go with the romans, they were the most scientific/and organized army in the world back then. Our army is pretty much based off of them. and Swat teams also use the tactic where they move as 1 giant shield, riot shields placed over heads, and also they had the retirement and health benefits. they were also amazing fighters, they fought individual, but moved as a group, they never broke formation, if they did they would be flogged. they also had a great strategy, the Roman Legionars would fight in a certain way, each row would hold eachothers back, while they waited for the Centurian to blow his whistle, once blown, the romans would exchange fighters, so that way the roman army would not be tired. they also prefered the Gladius over the Spear, at the battle of Cynocepholai *or however you spell it* the roman legions would fight against one of the most powerful tactics in history back then, the phalanx. The romans ducked under the phalanx and started gashing at the phalanx. The roman army would also never give up, they would wait forever until they got what they wanted. they would be persistent in where they would fight. Definatly one of the more determined armys, but also one of the most brutal

why would you say that

Hmmm.. wow this is a tough choice.

For individual warrior, I go with Hannibal Barca. That man had balls more dense than diamonds, and had a brilliance in military affairs like no other. If the Council in Carthage listened to Hannibal, we may very well not be speaking English today.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hannibal


Now for a warrior culture.. God so many to choose from.. I guess I will go with the Zulu. Shaka Zulus reforms to his tribe and military, and his concepts on warfare and battle changed the face of battle in Africa. had Shaka been born a few hundred years prior, Africa may very well be a different place than we know it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaka

i agree with you on hannibal. Hannibal was one of the greatest tacticians in the world, he was a great inspirerer's, and also one of the most loved. But i would say that his one fault was that he could never back up a victory, he could have won the 2nd Punic War

His hands were tied. Carthage did not want the complete downfall of Rome , they were terrified of Rome. Had they given Hannibal full control over his army, he would have sacked Rome as he wanted to. Many attribute this failure wrongly to Hannibal. It was the Councils fault, not his. He was just following orders (sadly so for one of the rare times he did).

indeed, now i am curious to see as to what our other members think, i personally prefer ancient warfare

Oh, well. A single man in history....Well Alexander trully fits for me. I could o said Genghis or Napoleon, but i do not feel their weight as much as Alexander weighed in the battles and wars.

As for an army...well, the Spartans WERE a terrifying force, but...i have to go with the Chinese during and after the 3 kingdom war.(dun remember the exact name). The battling between 3 sects increased their cultural and militaristic technology CENTURIES in front of anything that was being done in the rest of the world.

Alexander Did deserve credit for his battles and defeating the persians. but his father Philip did most of the work by putting his army together. i am unsure if it was alexander of philip that decided to make the macedonian phalanx spears longer, but either way, alexander was a great general, actually the greatest one in history

you guys can also post why you chose these

Skorp wrote:Alexander Did deserve credit for his battles and defeating the persians. but his father Philip did most of the work by putting his army together. i am unsure if it was alexander of philip that decided to make the macedonian phalanx spears longer, but either way, alexander was a great general, actually the greatest one in history

Alexander was a megolomaniac and an egocentric. He was genius in battle yes, but come on.. the battles where not THAT complex. I think he is overrated. And yes, it was Phillip, not Alexander, who reformed the military and gave the hoplites pikes.

I like Hannibal!



Cannae... EPIC WIN!

Cannae was a slaughter and deservingly so. The romans were VERY arrogant in that fight and deserved to lose. Not to insult or belittle Hannibals victory, but there are much better examples of hannibals genius than cannae, Trebia comes to mind. The flanking maneuvers in that battle were genius.

indeed, and also with hannibal there was a reason he wanted his troops like that. when the romans pushed forward, hannibal wanted to surround them on all sides and massacre them. and thats exactly what he did, but yes i agree with champ

INDIANS LOL

William Wallace?

Sun Tzu?

ok those are the individual armies and people, i need both and an explanation why

As an individual i would say George Patton. His string of victories and achievements from the fight against Panco Villa to fighting in WWI and WWII gave him a reputation that the Germans feared in WWII. most notably his reaction to the attempted German break out on December 16, 1944. He was able to quickly turn his Third Army north in reaction to the attempted break out. He was responsible for the organization of the armor school, development and adaptation of the doctrine that we used to fight Armor in WWII and, for the most part, still use today.

Seeking to inspire his men, Patton developed a flashy image and routinely wore a highly polished helmet, cavalry pants and boots, and a pair of ivory-handled pistols. Traveling in a vehicle featuring oversize rank insignias and sirens, his speeches were frequently laced with profanity and espoused the utmost confidence in his men. His behavior was popular with his troops.

As a fighting force? That's tough there are so many to choose from. I am gonna stay with my preference for modern military history and say that the Armies of the US during WWII are my favorite. Fearsome? no not really, not at first but, the American fighting man had a reputation for doing what needed to be done spawning acts of heroism both on individual and group levels. entering the second word war we were at a severe disadvantage in equipment and armor. The Sherman Tank was inferior in every way to what we were fighting in europe but what we lacked in technology we made up for in fighting spirit and determination. Not to mention a superior use of combat aircraft.

hmm very nice, you served in the military yourself did you not ptol?

The Spartans..... or Achilles


idk....

and why do you say those

MUST you really ask that? I would figure someone would have given the obvious answer of spartans/achilles by now