The Romans were able to expand their territory because they had strong army which was organised into legions.
The legion had several advantages over the plalanx.It was smaller and could move faster.Soldiers in a Phalanx were used to fighting as a group and attacking only from one direction .Each legionary depended on his own fighting ability .The groups within s legion could split off from the main body and attack from sides and the rear as well as the front .
Legionaries were well trained .They spent hours practing with their double -edged iron swords .They went on long marches every day.Befor going to sleep, they had to build comete fortified camps,even when the legion would stay in the area only one night .They built roads out of lava blocks so troops and supplies could move forward more rapidly.
-answered by Riya
The Roman army was professional and better equipped than many other armies. The military career lasted 20 years and soldiers trained and were drilled regularly. The soldiers were disciplined, well versed with warfare and were less likely buckle under pressure. Rome also had many good military commanders who later during the empire also became professionals. Roman military tactics were good. Grit and determination were also Roman military characteristics. They would go to any length, as the building of the first military road (the Appian way, which was the first stone-paved road in history) in 312 BC to speed up the movement of troops and supplies to the front of the second Samnite War and the building of a bridge across the very wide river Danube to reach the Dacians (In Romania and Moldova) who were raiding the empire from across that river demonstrate.
Additionally, Rome's military success was based on its flexibility. The same basic structure could adapt to local conditions and defeat very different opponents. Over time the Romans became skilled at raids and ambushes as any irregular tribesmen, yet preserved their superiority in massed battles.
Romans always fought aggressively and their ability to accept heavy losses and regain any lost strength made them difficult to beat.
The Romans were able to expand their territory because they had strong army which was organised into legions.
The legion had several advantages over the plalanx.It was smaller and could move faster.Soldiers in a Phalanx were used to fighting as a group and attacking only from one direction .Each legionary depended on his own fighting ability .The groups within s legion could split off from the main body and attack from sides and the rear as well as the front .
Legionaries were well trained .They spent hours practing with their double -edged iron swords .They went on long marches every day.Befor going to sleep, they had to build comete fortified camps,even when the legion would stay in the area only one night .They built roads out of lava blocks so troops and supplies could move forward more rapidly.
-answered by Riya
The Roman army was professional and better equipped than many other armies. The military career lasted 20 years and soldiers trained and were drilled regularly. The soldiers were disciplined, well versed with warfare and were less likely buckle under pressure. Rome also had many good military commanders who later during the empire also became professionals. Roman military tactics were good. Grit and determination were also Roman military characteristics. They would go to any length, as the building of the first military road (the Appian way, which was the first stone-paved road in history) in 312 BC to speed up the movement of troops and supplies to the front of the second Samnite War and the building of a bridge across the very wide river Danube to reach the Dacians (In Romania and Moldova) who were raiding the empire from across that river demonstrate.
Additionally, Rome's military success was based on its flexibility. The same basic structure could adapt to local conditions and defeat very different opponents. Over time the Romans became skilled at raids and ambushes as any irregular tribesmen, yet preserved their superiority in massed battles.
Romans always fought aggressively and their ability to accept heavy losses and regain any lost strength made them difficult to beat.
They were not unbeatable: Hannibal proved that. But they were very good at doing what they did in general. As in many other times they use others to do the actual fighting for them, and then claim the glory as their own. But generally they are well trained and cohesive, even in defeat at Cannae they breach Hannibals defenses line, though at great cost. Again as a generalisation their leadership is good, Julius Caesar & Scipio Africanus being pre eminent. They show the value of Imperialism, they make themselves look unchallengable because they establish a reputation for high military standards. But they were ultimately defeated, though the Roman Empire lasted for a very long time, hundreds of years.
They were extremely well trained, very well equipped and provisioned and had some of the best military leaders the world has ever seen.
Training and discipline.
In Australian slang, it's a person who is unbeatable in sport.
so all could see
when searching in the history i think the Muslim commander Khaled ibn Alwaleed because he fought the biggest empires in the history ( the Persian empire and the eastern roman empire ) with few numbers of soldiers an in only 13 months he controlled all the Iraqi land and Syria and Lebanon and Palestine and he destroyed 4 huge armies in Iraq and more than 6 huge armies in Syria in Iraq he led 18000 soldiers against 4 armies the first was 50000 , the second was 70000 , the third was 60000 , the fourth was 80000 in Syria he led 30000 to 40000 against 90000 roman soldiers in fahl battle and ge defeat them and 200000 in yarmouk battle an defeat them
The Crusades.
Genghis Khan
economic issues
There were several dominant Roman armies in history. These Roman armies include the Romany Army of the Mid-Repubic, Imperial Roman Army, Middle Byzantine Army, and Komnenian Byzantine Army.
The Roman armies were able to defeat and conquer so many people because they were better equipped, better trained, and better disciplined. They were simply better than their enemies.The Roman armies were able to defeat and conquer so many people because they were better equipped, better trained, and better disciplined. They were simply better than their enemies.The Roman armies were able to defeat and conquer so many people because they were better equipped, better trained, and better disciplined. They were simply better than their enemies.The Roman armies were able to defeat and conquer so many people because they were better equipped, better trained, and better disciplined. They were simply better than their enemies.The Roman armies were able to defeat and conquer so many people because they were better equipped, better trained, and better disciplined. They were simply better than their enemies.The Roman armies were able to defeat and conquer so many people because they were better equipped, better trained, and better disciplined. They were simply better than their enemies.The Roman armies were able to defeat and conquer so many people because they were better equipped, better trained, and better disciplined. They were simply better than their enemies.The Roman armies were able to defeat and conquer so many people because they were better equipped, better trained, and better disciplined. They were simply better than their enemies.The Roman armies were able to defeat and conquer so many people because they were better equipped, better trained, and better disciplined. They were simply better than their enemies.
Greek & Roman armies :D
NO
lots of things
No.
Cleopatra knew her armies could never defeat the Roman armies, so she defended the independence of Egypt by making alliances, first with Julius Caesar and then with Marc Antony.
the roman empire had alot of armies and alot of people so it was very strong it also has its own religon
the annals of the roman armies were amazing
In encampments, like all armies.
i dont know much about king authur but i do think that he was unbeatable. if he was not he had so many people to back him up so simple answer would be YES