What was the largest army (military) in History? (bomb, generals, economy)

[Irishtom29]

According to John Keegan Genghiz Khan's army was organized in "thousands" (and other factors of 10 going down to "tens") and had at it's peak 95 such thousands.

Steppe armies weren't very big and the Mongols counted on speed, organization and tactics not overwhelming force. The Mongol army defeated by the Egyptians at Ain Julut (which had recently sacked Bahgdad) may have had only about 25,000 men.

[Dd714]

Originally Posted by Irishtom29

According to John Keegan Genghiz Khan's army was organized in "thousands" (and other factors of 10 going down to "tens") and had at it's peak 95 such thousands.

Steppe armies weren't very big and the Mongols counted on speed, organization and tactics not overwhelming force. The Mongol army defeated by the Egyptians at Ain Julut (which had recently sacked Bahgdad) may have had only about 25,000 men.

Just read a Genghis Khan book and you are exactly correct. The author I read (Harold Lang) indicates the Mongol Horde may have numbered 250,000 at most, and that is for a Kingdom that stretched from Austria, down to India, to Korea.

Mongol speed was the key, the ability to ride hundreds of miles to defeat one force, and then turn around and defeat another force that was meant to reinforce the first. That and communication - the Mongols had the first version of the pony express.

They also liked to hit their enemy while on they were on the move and disorganized. Thus they frequenty used the tactic of appearing to retreat, and having the enemy assuming a chase, and then turning around to attack.

[burneggroll]

Roman historian Edward Gibbon estimates in his book The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire that the peak size of the Roman army in the late imperial period was on the order of 375,000 men. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Decline_and_Fall_of_the_Roman_Empire

Ghengis Khan controlled 100 million people with an army of fewer than 250,000. http://www.carpenoctem.tv/military/khan.html

In 1864 the U.S. Union Army was the largest army the world had ever seen. At 2.3 million men it was larger than any current army in the world. Four million officers and men served in either the Union or Confederate armies. http://www.answers.com/topic/united-states-army

1945 Soviet Army was the largest the world has seen to date. The Red Army conscripted 29,574,900 men in addition to the 4,826,907 in service at the beginning of the war. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Army

Current largest army: China 1.6 million men. http://www.mapsofworld.com/world-top-ten/world-top-ten-countries-with-largest-armies-map.html

[Wingfoot]

Soviet Army was the biggest and by 44-45 quite possibly the best.

[thelogannator123]

you know i think we need to change the question, instead of largest army in history, rather the question should be largest army compared to the total population of the world. because no one can deny that today's population is a lot bigger then it was hundreds of years ago. for example during the Persian invasion of Greece, under Xerxes, the Persian army was believed to have been around 200,000-250,000. now compared to today's army's, this is puny, but compared to army's of that day, it was rather large.

[Ounce]

In China the Taipei Rebellion which started in 1850 and ended in 1864.

The rebels had an army that was between 1 million to 3 millon.
The Imperial troops had an army between 2 million to 5 million.

Taiping Rebellion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[Dd714]

Originally Posted by thelogannator123

you know i think we need to change the question, instead of largest army in history, rather the question should be largest army compared to the total population of the world. because no one can deny that today's population is a lot bigger then it was hundreds of years ago. for example during the Persian invasion of Greece, under Xerxes, the Persian army was believed to have been around 200,000-250,000. now compared to today's army's, this is puny, but compared to army's of that day, it was rather large.

I still think their will be no comparison to the 20th century - the mobilization in WW1 or WW2 - in both size of the armies of individual nations and per percentage of the population moblized. The "citizen soldier" is a modern idea. Prior to the 18th century wars were fought by a warrior class of nobles, mercenaries, and some slaves. That and the agricultural basis of pre-industrial society - farmers couldn't leave the fields for an extended period of time. The Persian army had a number of slaves from throughout the world, and mercenaries. Greek was actually the first society to practice some sort of conscription as a way to "citizenship", but it wasn't common until the age of Napolean.

That, and, really, any ancient report of battles, apart from the Roman empire who kept very precise records, is extremely innacurate. The number of participants should be followed by a huge question mark.

[Dwatted Wabbit]

The USA had 15+ million under arms at the end of WWII. That's about 10% of our population at the time. Not shabby, exactly.

Soviet population
June 1941: 197~ million;
Dec 1945: 171~ million.
Don't know how accurate those numbers are, I found them on the internet. Otherwise I'd have to go dig up some of our old World Almanacs.

[Nomadtribes]

In the Late 100s into the late 200s, there was a period in China called the Sam-guk-chi. The land was divided into 3 parcels by 3 different warlords. Their names were Yubi, Songwan, and Chio Chio. (These names are all Chinese.) Chio Chio owned most of China at the time, and once he even had an army of 1,600,000. Probably, that was one of the biggest armies that the world at that time ever had until the 20th century.

[esmoca]

I remember reading somewhere that the USA had 8 million men in uniform at the end of WWII