BQ78 said:

---

I tend to think more about the Rhoman Empire, since it is just south of Paradise in Wise County

---

Rabid Cougar said:

---

McClelland's Army of the Potomac on the Peninsula was upwards of110,000 in 1861. He had nearly 90,000 at Antietam in 1862. Meade had 105,000 at Gettysburg in 1863. Grant had 125,000 on the Overland Campaign in 1864. Sherman had 124,000 in 1864.

You could sustain large armies for long periods of time if supply lines were open and Sherman did so even without a supply line.

Less disease ridden? In the American Civil War there were more deaths from disease than bullets. Rural American's had little to no disease immunity built up. Crowded numbers and lack of hygiene was the worst enemy on both side

---

Jabin said:

---

Quote:

---

There's zero evidence to support armies of that size in that era.

---

Huh? Ancient writers may be wrong, but they nevertheless constitute evidence.

And estimates of population density are all over the map, demonstrate modern presuppositions and biases, are frequently proven wrong, and again are universally contradicted by ancient writers. I've actually taken a somewhat deep dive into estimates of ancient populations and they're all based on presuppositions that can easily be shown to be wrong or arbitrarily limited, and are contradicted by proven contemporaneous evidence.

And don't folks that believe in "ancient aliens" rely on arguments similar to yours about the "logistics of movement and sustaining operations" to argue that the ancient Egyptians couldn't have built the pyramids? Aren't you imputing your personal lack of knowledge to the abilities of the ancients?

---

Apache said:

---

Well, you won't see "Titus Pullo" in anything new... actor Ray Stevenson passed away a few months ago.

---

Rongagin71 said:

---

That is too recent - if there is anything to the idea that people in Roman times were smaller and less diseased it will have nothing to do with our War Between the States.

---