The point is not out how many nations they came but if they campaigned as one force

IIRC nobody claimed different armies

And they did not march as one army on one road

The different armies itself had been divided into corps

Not really the problem is supply and running the farms .

Oh I think the Sumerians, Babylonian and Persian as well as Alexander would say they had been first

after a while Vercingetorix forced the noncombatants to leave the city because he run out of food.

AFAIK the died in the no mans land

I meant armies in the field outside of waterways logistic was limited to drawn carts or waggons, the draft animals need to eat

In total maybe as one army without starving to death not really

caesars number are IMHO most likely pure propaganda fantasy.

There was no way the gauls could have supplied 250.000 men in one army neither could rome.

exactly like the maccabeans kept sabbath in combat, they fought

If you do strategy in battle you do it wrong

laxity is not the domain of non profession armies.

There could and have been very professinal armies and soldiers who did not make it their profession and vice versa.

AFAIK both things happened

Paying an ordinary army with money was the exception, not the rule

>But the truth is, by the time America gained its independence in 1776, swords were already obsolete. Maybe there are swordsmen at the time but they are never "notable" because their weapons are not useful anymore on the battlefield.

The participants in the napoleonic wars would not agree

Exactly Weapons are less important than their use, skill, Organisation, tacticst and operations

Yes, i did but in context with medieval militia i wanted to make sure that was clear

>No it was two Pila, one was lighter and the other was heavier.

But AFAIK history marched on and discarded that the legionary used 2 Pila in battle

those "standing" forces were citicen called to the eagles with their own kit

for that spade and dolabra were used

and they had sophisticated entrenching tools

you do not cast swords, less iron or steal swords they will shatter to easily then.

only after the republic endet

2 that happened at the end of the republic , the marian reforms before the legionaries had been recruited from the farmers and craftsmenthe plebeians not the proletariat - the poor

>There were plenty of cheap long blades like German (not that it was Germany at the time...) messers and such that were often used.

messers were made by knifesmiths not swordsmiths

​

>In a fight whether, is one-on-one, or 100 on 100, pole arms are generally better... to say nothing of you know, being able to shoot people if they're unarmoured. Which makes sense and the Roman's knew that, thus their love of the javelin and darts.

the romans won at pydna and other battles against polearm wielders

one pilum

Javelins were used by the velites the skirnishers

show me please the roman unit which used pikes

this was the migration period - early middle ages