Between attrition (lost in battle), needing to leave troops behind to control conquered territory, and longer supply lines, shouldn’t the armies have gotten significantly thinner and weaker.
In: 247
It depends on the era that you’re considering. Morale/confidence is still a significant factor in warfare but was massive for melee combat, so an army that won several battles was likely to be more confident. Being seen as strong/victorious also helped recruit local allies and mercenaries.
Detaching troops to garrison captured territory was sometimes a problem, but many armies simply didn’t do it. Keeping force concentrated and being able to retake the territory if needed was often easier than dividing the force with enough strength for each portion to be effective.
Ancient armies frequently lived off foraged and captured supplies throughout a campaign, so supply lines were less critical than in recent wars.
Latest Answers