military strengths in westeros, beyond shear numbers

[Graydon Hicks]

ok, to try to bring us back on topic, i would like to put forth my synopsis of military  specialties.

the reach: largest army do to sheer population. reasonably well equipped, as it is the second wealthiest region (may in fact be the wealthiest in terms of a true economy. proper taxation, trade, ect. the westerlands wealth seems to be based solely out of the mines.) probably largest force of "knights", it is the home of the chivalry tradition of the Faith of the Seven.probably largest force of cavalry, but not necessarily heavy armored horse. the wealth and population means they have more at home resources than any other realm.

the westerlands: best equipped army. the massive hard currency wealth the lannisters have means they can afford to purchase or craft armor, weapons, and regular army supplies, like tents, bedrolls, all those ordinary things an army needs but takes for granted, in bulk, straight out. that wealth also means they can more readily hire sellswords as well. most of the their standing army, which, also because of wealth, they can keep more of for longer periods, even during peace times, is professionally trained.

the riverlands: seems very typical of the military of westeros. similar kinds of troops to the reach, but of less quality. the region serves as the primary battleground whenever any of the other realms has a quarrel with another. since the riverlands borders all the lands save dorne, thats where everyone tends to meet to hash it out. this pattern of roughly one war per generation, almost always fought in the riverlands, has served to keep the central region of westeros from fully developing to its potential.

the vale: honestly, though i alwasy find references to the Knights of the Vale, i have a hard time determining what kind of troops they actually have, not the numbers. not every knight is a horseman. and while the vale proper likely has a suitably large number of cavalry knights, or cavalry in general, its kinda of hard to make effective use of horses in the mountains of the moon. so they feel like a slight unknown to me.

dorne: though dorne is about as large as the westerlands or the stormlands, its almost all desert, so most of its population lives along either one of the major rivers, like the greenblood, or along the coast, in sunspear, lemonwood, salt shore, or the tor.  the forces they can raise can suitably defend the main passes into dorne, and look to be mostly spear men, and light cavalry, like mounted archers. from what i can gather, their spear-men are very disciplined, but not heavily armoured, but whether thats do to the wealth of the realm, or do to the sheer heat of the desert, which could likely kill a fully armored knight, and his horse, in days, if not hours. i live in a desert, so i have an inkling of what heat can do to people in even light clothing.

the stormlands: i gather that the type of troops found in stormlands is simliar to what is found in the riverlands and the reach, but likely less well equipped than the reach, better than the riverlands. from what i read in AWOIAF, they a stronger martial tradition than most of the other realms, so the general quality is a it higher than most of the other realms in training, but less numerous. i also inferred from the book that they seemed to produce berserker warrior like Robert, and it seems to be a regional trait. the baratheons moto isn't "ours is the fury" for nothing.

the north: while i am little prejudiced in the favor of northern fantasy cultures in general, i am trying to be as objective as i can be and look at how their environment affects them. many say that  they would be less well eqipped, and i can agree with that, the north isnt nearly as prosperous as the reach or westerlands. the population is too wide spread for the regular training to be efficient in implementation. but the ruggedness of the terrain, the distances between population centers, even between homesteads, the climate, would breed a sense of self reliance. these would tough men and women. they might not be well trained, but they would be very fierce in fighting, and the general sense of honor that seems to pervade the First Men culture of the north, which seems to judge a man by his actions rather than who his father is, (greatjon wasn't willing to put faith in robb, til robb stood up and took his fingers by use of direwolf, to prove that he had the guts to lead) lends itself to a feirce loyalty to their lords. they are likely more physically hardy than the troops of the south.

the iron isles: master sailors in coastal waters, but longships cant really handle blue (open sea) water. almost no cavalry to speak of, but very mobile in amphibious operation. very skilled and savage in close fighting, but nearly no discpline. troops seemed to be held together by fear/fearful respect of their commanders. like the north, put a stronger emphasis on a man's actions rather than who he is related to.masters of skirmishes and raiding strikes, but typically not willing to commit to a dedicated attack on a fortified/well defended position without superior numbers. 

[PrinceHenryris]

This seems to have devolved into a discussion about equipment and numbers.

I'd like to put a different spin on it, but before I do I'd like to make one comment.

A mounted lance, without other information is no better or worse than an anointed knight.  If you were the defendant in a Trial by Seven would you rather have an Umber and Sandor Clegane on your side or Aerys Oakheart and Boros Blount?

Now, on to my own spin...

If I'm viewing it from the perspective of a potential conqueror, I'd rank them from easiest to hardest in this order:

1) Riverlands, duh?

2) The Reach, not easy, but rich and not completely unified;

3) The Vale, Starve them out;

4) The West, same thing;

5) The Stormlands, guerrilla attacks;

6) The North, Naval attack, but even if I won some battles I'll lose the war; and 

7) Dorne.  Aegon, his sisters and their dragons couldn't conquer Dorne.  Daeron couldn't hold it it.

From a defensive standpoint The North and Dorne are the strongest.

[Graydon Hicks]

dorne just cant held by force, the environment is to inhospitable for the andal and first men style armies. the only realestate worth having is the red mountains with the first men houses there, and sunspear. the people seem able to switch to Bedouin style living easily, since it seems that is what they did when aegon and his sisters came to call. with as small an army as everyone says they have, they have to make use of that terrain to help bleed their foes before fully engaging.

[Free Northman Reborn]

16 minutes ago, Graydon Hicks said:

dorne just cant held by force, the environment is to inhospitable for the andal and first men style armies. the only realestate worth having is the red mountains with the first men houses there, and sunspear. the people seem able to switch to Bedouin style living easily, since it seems that is what they did when aegon and his sisters came to call. with as small an army as everyone says they have, they have to make use of that terrain to help bleed their foes before fully engaging.

This Q&A with Martin, from back in 2002, might be of interest to you.

Question:

Armor. Ive noticed that outside of Westeros and even in Dorne people use bronze armor pretty frequently. I was wondering about the metal working skills of these people. They use iron/steel in weaponry but use highly inferior armor.

George's Answer:

The Dornish use a lot of copper, but mainly for ornamental purposes. It's very pretty flashing in the sun. As pretty as gold, but cheaper.

Question:

Understandably it is far lighter than platemail or something but It strikes me as a little wierd. An army armored in bronze going against an army in iron will inevitably lose... Sorry to nitpick, so tell me to shut up if Im out of line hehe

George's answer:

Dornish fighting tactics differ from those of the rest of the Seven Kingdoms. Saladin's warriors were pretty lightly armored when they went up against Richard the Lion Hearted and his Crusaders, but still did pretty well.

 

[Graydon Hicks]

oh yeah, i remember the crusades. the ottomans knew how to fight in a desert. i'd say that the dornish are as skilled as anyone, look at oberyn. but they are also smart. the dornish have never really fought out side of their lands, save for relatively small invasion of the reach, like when they attacked oldtown, and strikes up into the southern stormlands. but other than that, they never really had the aggressive expansionist goals that the stormlords, ironborn, and other westerosi had, they tended to stick close to home, and have never truly been beaten on their own turf, save by dareon the young dragon, and he lost 10,00o taking it, and 40,000 holding it. the martells are very true to their house words. 

[Frey Kings]

Iron Islanders have the best fighting men per capita

Dorne has been dealing with far east  than the rest of the kingdoms so I expect more prosperity in certain areas 

Even though the Reach is the most fertile, 2nd richest and some say can raise the double the men of the next fighting force, They are not as harden 

Isn't the Crownlands thriving in economic prosperity ever since Aegon's Conquest and capital of KL???

 

The North is a economic mess all around besides White Harbor 

[Graydon Hicks]

the north is simply far more rustic. its also the most removed from the capital, and doesnt play the "game" nearly as much as the southern realms do. there just isnt all that much to attract the economic interests of the free cities, and most of the rest of westeros view them and their First Men culture as extremely barbaric. remember the just about everyone south of the Neck, save for a very few old first men houses in the vale, riverlands and mountains of dorne, are andal by either ethnicity or faith in worshiping the seven gods of andalos, while the north is almost purely blood and faith of the First Men. so the north tends to get forgotten on the way side most of the time when folks look at economics or international polcies while sitting in the red keep. whenthe north does get involved with the south, it either turned out really bad for the south, or really bad for the north.

the crownlands maybe doing very well economically since the beginning the targaryen dynasty, with relatively easy access across the narrow sea to the free cities, but they a smaller population compared to the other realms. not as much territory. in fact, i think their greatest military strength was they were the primary source for the royal navy, both in providing the ships, and the locals to base them in.

sunspear in dorne might have a strong economy, but they very resource poor. they grow olives, and have a sour wine, but i would guess, judging by the population focus to the coast, most of their livelihood comes fishing, or being a sea trade stopping point, like the free cities. not actually producing anything to export, but being where merchants can gather and exchange goods. then having the goods taxed as they enter and leave port.

 while the reach has the greatest amount of greenboys to make up its force (they likely just throw bodies at the problem til it goes away), they also likely have the largest number of full knights.

and the iron isles have a tradition of men either being fishermen to fed the isles, or reavers to fight. if you did anything else, you werent an iron islander, you were a thrall.

[Free Northman Reborn]

1 hour ago, StraightFromAsshai said:

Iron Islanders have the best fighting men per capita

Dorne has been dealing with far east  than the rest of the kingdoms so I expect more prosperity in certain areas 

Even though the Reach is the most fertile, 2nd richest and some say can raise the double the men of the next fighting force, They are not as harden 

Isn't the Crownlands thriving in economic prosperity ever since Aegon's Conquest and capital of KL???

 

The North is a economic mess all around besides White Harbor 

As we've covered before in previous threads, the main source of medieval wealth was land. Agricultural land, specifically. And of that, the North has vastly more than Dorne.

Consider that both the North and Dorne have climate limitations on agricultural production. Cold climate would primarily be the limiting factor in the North, and yet we read that even the northernmost climate zone - the Gift - is good farmland, while in Dorne the deep desert would be useless for farming. And most of Dorne is covered in desert. So let's say 20% of Dorne has a climate that could support agriculture, while the entire North has a climate suitable for agriculture (right up to the Wall).

However, climate aside, let's ignore half of the North, to account for forests (although even the forests are inhabited and contains farmland) and other wilderness areas like the Neck etc. That still leaves you with 50% of the North that can support agriculture. Compared to perhaps 20% of Dorne if we are generous.

But then we also have to factor in the fact that the North is 4 times the size of Dorne. So total agricultural land in the North should be about 10 times that of Dorne in surface area.

In short, the North without a doubt produces vastly more agricultural output than Dorne. Also note that the North has a trade city, while Dorne has none. So this idea that the North is the region with the lowest GDP in Westeros is a fallacy. It might have the lowest per capita GDP, because of a much larger population than Dorne, but in terms of total economic output it would vastly exceed Dorne.

[Lord Varys]

4 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

Consider that both the North and Dorne have climate limitations on agricultural production. Cold climate would primarily be the limiting factor in the North, and yet we read that even the northernmost climate zone - the Gift - is good farmland, while in Dorne the deep desert would be useless for farming. And most of Dorne is covered in desert. So let's say 20% of Dorne has a climate that could support agriculture, while the entire North has a climate suitable for agriculture (right up to the Wall).

The Gifts are not good farmland. Some reaches of the Gift are farmed. That's not the same. There is no good farmland in the entire North. Not in comparison to the South. Nobody ever refers to the North as being a fertile land.

4 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

However, climate aside, let's ignore half of the North, to account for forests (although even the forests are inhabited and contains farmland) and other wilderness areas like the Neck etc. That still leaves you with 50% of the North that can support agriculture. Compared to perhaps 20% of Dorne if we are generous.

The amount of potential farmland is irrelevant. The point is that the North is mostly an empty land. If nobody works the land it makes no difference whether it is fertile land or not. And there are summer snows in the North. The North is, on average, not land where people can harvest crops throughout the years.

4 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

In short, the North without a doubt produces vastly more agricultural output than Dorne. Also note that thee North has a trade city, while Dorne has none. So this idea that the North is the region with the lowest GDP in Westeros is a fallacy. It might have the lowest per capita GDP, because of a much larger population than Dorne, but in terms of total economic output it would vastly exceed Dorne.

Sorry, that is false reasoning. Sure, you can't plant any crops in the desert away from the water. But you can along the rivers and wells. Ancient Egypt existed just along the Nile shores yet it produced so much grain it could feed millions of people, not just in Egypt itself but also around the Mediterranean. The amount of land you have says little about its fertility, and most of the land in the North is clearly not even used for farming. The people living along the Greenblood alone may be able to produce twice or thrice the amount of food the entire North produces in a summer. And in Dorne people should be able to harvest crops not just in summer but in spring, autumn, and winter as well. It usually doesn't snow in Dorne.

Dorne produces enough oranges so that Septon Meribald can give them away for free to poor Riverlanders.

Land is worth nothing if you don't have the men, the means, and the techniques to make the best of it. And the Northmen clearly don't have that. If your land is just fertile enough to support a meager population then you don't have the numbers to actually cultivate the entire land. People only spread out and work more land if the land they are sitting on is no longer feeding everyone. 

[direpupy]

4 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Sorry, that is false reasoning. Sure, you can't plant any crops in the desert away from the water. But you can along the rivers and wells. Ancient Egypt existed just along the Nile shores yet it produced so much grain it could feed millions of people, not just in Egypt itself but also around the Mediterranean. The amount of land you have says little about its fertility, and most of the land in the North is clearly not even used for farming. The people living along the Greenblood alone may be able to produce twice or thrice the amount of food the entire North produces in a summer. And in Dorne people should be able to harvest crops not just in summer but in spring, autumn, and winter as well. It usually doesn't snow in Dorne.

Your comparison to Ancient Egypt only works if the Greenblood has an annual flood like the Nile, since we never hear of this you yourself are making a false reasoning here.

Without an annual flood the Greenblood would be more like the river Niger and thus the amount of food produced would be much less, it is estimated that along the river Niger they could only produce a tenth of what was produced along the Nile.

[direpupy]

5 hours ago, Graydon Hicks said:

ok, to try to bring us back on topic, i would like to put forth my synopsis of military  specialties.

the vale: honestly, though i alwasy find references to the Knights of the Vale, i have a hard time determining what kind of troops they actually have, not the numbers. not every knight is a horseman. and while the vale proper likely has a suitably large number of cavalry knights, or cavalry in general, its kinda of hard to make effective use of horses in the mountains of the moon. so they feel like a slight unknown to me.
 

I think you are saying sensible things in your post so i only want to ad something to your remarks on the Vale.

I think they would have a lager amount of dismounted man at arms because of the difficulty of using horses in a mountain area.

[Free Northman Reborn]

29 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

The Gifts are not good farmland. Some reaches of the Gift are farmed. That's not the same. There is no good farmland in the entire North. Not in comparison to the South. Nobody ever refers to the North as being a fertile land.

The amount of potential farmland is irrelevant. The point is that the North is mostly an empty land. If nobody works the land it makes no difference whether it is fertile land or not. And there are summer snows in the North. The North is, on average, not land where people can harvest crops throughout the years.

Sorry, that is false reasoning. Sure, you can't plant any crops in the desert away from the water. But you can along the rivers and wells. Ancient Egypt existed just along the Nile shores yet it produced so much grain it could feed millions of people, not just in Egypt itself but also around the Mediterranean. The amount of land you have says little about its fertility, and most of the land in the North is clearly not even used for farming. The people living along the Greenblood alone may be able to produce twice or thrice the amount of food the entire North produces in a summer. And in Dorne people should be able to harvest crops not just in summer but in spring, autumn, and winter as well. It usually doesn't snow in Dorne.

Dorne produces enough oranges so that Septon Meribald can give them away for free to poor Riverlanders.

Land is worth nothing if you don't have the men, the means, and the techniques to make the best of it. And the Northmen clearly don't have that. If your land is just fertile enough to support a meager population then you don't have the numbers to actually cultivate the entire land. People only spread out and work more land if the land they are sitting on is no longer feeding everyone. 

This entire post is an attempt to frame a position that you fervently want to believe. But it is simply devoid of logic or truth. The arguments you use are simply fallacious, and resort to straw man fallacies again.

Of COURSE not all the available land in the North is farmed. Neither is every shred of the perhaps 10%-20% of Dornish territory that has a farmable climate covered in crops. No medieval land on earth farmed every shred of available land. The argument really is very simple -  if you would remove your emotional need to portray the North as arctic tundra or the like.

Even the wildlings farm crops. North of the Wall. Bran's group points out orchards and good farmland in the Gift. Now compare the Gift - the northernmost part of the North (however infertile you think it may be) to the deep desert of Dorne. In the deep desert, ZERO crops can grow. In the Gift, the land can support agriculture. That is fact.

So Fact 1: The North, percentage wise, has more agricultural land than Dorne. How much greater is that percentage? Conservatively, 2-3 times greater.

Fact 2: The North is also much larger than Dorne. Around 4 times larger. So multiply a two or three times higher percentage, with a total area that is 4 times larger, then you get to total agricultural land in the North that must be at least 10 times greater in surface area than that of Dorne. This cannot be denied. It is simply not possible to do so logically. Quantitatively, the North has vastly more agricultural land than Dorne.

Now we can get to the valid point that you do raise, which is the comparative quality of said agricultural land. This point says that the Dornish agricultural land that is available, may have a higher output per square mile than that in the North.

Now, firstly, the Dornish agricultural land would vary in quality, just like that in the North. The quality of the land in the Gift would not be the same as in the Rills, Bolton, Locke or Manderly lands. So some of the Dornish farmland will be extremely poor, barely producing a measly crop in some arid, scorched conditions. But others of it might be very productive, located along flood plains of the various rivers that run through the kingdom.

So let's give them the benefit of the doubt, and say that half their agricultural land (10% of their total territory) is located in barely farmable arid areas, and half of it (another 10%) along rich flood plains next to rivers. So 10% of their land has a very high yield. So how high? Twice as high as that of the most fertile Northern lands along the White Knife or Rills, or Oldcastle or Flints Finger? Maybe even three times as high, if we want to be generous.

That still does not come close to narrowing the gap, though. The North would still produce 3-5 times as much total output as Dorne, simply due to the vastly greater land area they have.

Which is reflected in the fact that Dorne has the smallest population in the Seven Kingdoms.

[Lord Varys]

3 minutes ago, direpupy said:

Your comparison to Ancient Egypt only works if the Greenblood has an annual flood like the Nile, since we never hear of this you yourself are making a false reasoning here.

Without an annual flood the Greenblood would be more like the river Niger and thus the amount of food produced would be much less, it is estimated that along the river Niger they could only produce a tenth of what was produced along the Nile.

I never said that the lands along the Greenblood would be as fertile as the Nile valley. But they could be much more fertile than a lot of land in the North. We know that the Dornishmen use a lot of channeling to make the lands along the Greenblood and the other rivers fertile. And it is possible that there are cyclical floods. The water would mostly be coming from the mountains in any case. 

The Greenblood is a river that never runs dry and it is deep enough to be navigable by pretty big ships.

[Frey Kings]

2 hours ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

As we've covered before in previous threads, the main source of medieval wealth was land. Agricultural land, specifically. And of that, the North has vastly more than Dorne.

Consider that both the North and Dorne have climate limitations on agricultural production. Cold climate would primarily be the limiting factor in the North, and yet we read that even the northernmost climate zone - the Gift - is good farmland, while in Dorne the deep desert would be useless for farming. And most of Dorne is covered in desert. So let's say 20% of Dorne has a climate that could support agriculture, while the entire North has a climate suitable for agriculture (right up to the Wall).

However, climate aside, let's ignore half of the North, to account for forests (although even the forests are inhabited and contains farmland) and other wilderness areas like the Neck etc. That still leaves you with 50% of the North that can support agriculture. Compared to perhaps 20% of Dorne if we are generous.

But then we also have to factor in the fact that the North is 4 times the size of Dorne. So total agricultural land in the North should be about 10 times that of Dorne in surface area.

In short, the North without a doubt produces vastly more agricultural output than Dorne. Also note that the North has a trade city, while Dorne has none. So this idea that the North is the region with the lowest GDP in Westeros is a fallacy. It might have the lowest per capita GDP, because of a much larger population than Dorne, but in terms of total economic output it would vastly exceed Dorne.

I meant by trade and interactions with the rest of the known world.

 

There's more to the world than Westeros.

 

That's how empires grow and/or become powerhouses. 

 

Not the amount of farming land you have. If you were or want to become a fertile powerhouse like the Tyrells, The North simply does not have the #s to work the fields if they wanted it too.

 

 

I have no doubts that the Dornishmen are learning new crafts to better their kingdom. 

[Free Northman Reborn]

11 minutes ago, StraightFromAsshai said:

I meant by trade and interactions with the rest of the known world.

 

There's more to the world than Westeros.

 

That's how empires grow and/or become powerhouses. 

 

Not the amount of farming land you have. If you were or want to become a fertile powerhouse like the Tyrells, The North simply does not have the #s to work the fields if they wanted it too.

 

 

I have no doubts that the Dornishmen are learning new crafts to better their kingdom. 

I would just note that right through the Middle Ages England was primarily an agricultural economy. Westeros is not the Free Cities. It is a feudal, medieval, agriculture based society, modelled on our own history.

[Frey Kings]

49 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

I would just note that right through the Middle Ages England was primarily an agricultural economy. Westeros is not the Free Cities. It is a feudal, medieval, agriculture based society, modelled on our own history.

Noted.

There are tons of threads with ideas, but they all same to agree that The North is severely underdeveloped. 

When things settle down...

This one has great ideas as well as counter arguments so its not so one-sided...

http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php?/topic/77774-how-can-the-north-be-strengthened-economically-militarily-and-numerically/

http://racefortheironthrone.tumblr.com/post/126153637681/the-norths-economic-development-plan

Two things I disagree with is moving the wildlings in so quickly, it should be done gradually as they assimilate. Inter-marriage into noble houses is a great way to speed the process. 

Next is luring in the poor folks from the rest of the kingdoms, they should gather as much people that follow The Old Gods instead of the New. Then the new gods followers should move into the Manderly's lands. The key is assimilation. 

[Free Northman Reborn]

50 minutes ago, StraightFromAsshai said:

Noted.

There are tons of threads with ideas, but they all same to agree that The North is severely underdeveloped. 

When things settle down...

This one has great ideas as well as counter arguments so its not so one-sided...

http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php?/topic/77774-how-can-the-north-be-strengthened-economically-militarily-and-numerically/

http://racefortheironthrone.tumblr.com/post/126153637681/the-norths-economic-development-plan

Two things I disagree with is moving the wildlings in so quickly, it should be done gradually as they assimilate. Inter-marriage into noble houses is a great way to speed the process. 

Next is luring in the poor folks from the rest of the kingdoms, they should gather as much people that follow The Old Gods instead of the New. Then the new gods followers should move into the Manderly's lands. The key is assimilation. 

I think talk of settling more people in the North misses the point. At least, insofar as the main interior of the North is concerned. The Gift, Stoney shore and Sea Dragon point may be exceptions to that. In the Gift, the land is thinly inhabited because the Night's Watch cannot protect the peasants from wildling raids. So people have moved away. That is prime territory for resettlement, like Ned was planning to do.

The Stony Shore and Sea Dragon point are likely similar. The land is less fertile than most of the rest of the North, and because of periodic raids by the Ironborn, most people probably don't find it worth it to risk their lives to fight over it. Hence people moved away to more secure areas of the North.

But in the rest of the North I don't think there is a lack of people. The people are just dispersed over a vast area. I have said before, a population of 6 people per square mile would make the North very thinly populated compared to Europe in the Middle Ages. England for example had 40 people per square mile. France even higher. Even rural, cold and wild Scotland had 20 people per square mile.

So a density of 6 per square mile would make the North 7 times less populated than medieval England. Meaning if Robert Baratheon was riding his wagon train through England he would see 7 people before he saw one person while traveling through the North. No wonder he asked Ned where all the people were.

And yet, at 6 people per square mile the North would still have a population of 6 million. And you'd hardly see anyone most of the time.

This is the situation which I believe is the case. And nothing in the books disproves this. In fact, it seems quite reasonable, all things considered.

Lastly I would note that the name the Children of the Forest gave Dorne during the Dawn Age, was the "Empty Land". There is a reason that it was Dorne and not the North that was named so. The biomass supported by the North vastly exceeds that of Dorne. Dorne is mostly empty desert. No part of the North is empty of fauna and flora, by contrast.

[direpupy]

4 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

I never said that the lands along the Greenblood would be as fertile as the Nile valley. But they could be much more fertile than a lot of land in the North. We know that the Dornishmen use a lot of channeling to make the lands along the Greenblood and the other rivers fertile. And it is possible that there are cyclical floods. The water would mostly be coming from the mountains in any case. 

The Greenblood is a river that never runs dry and it is deep enough to be navigable by pretty big ships.

certainly they grow food we see some of that in the arrianne chapter where they try to meet up with some of the orphans during her atempt to make myrcella queen.

But in order for there to be more food then would be produced in the North you would most definetly need a river not unlike the Nile and the Greenblood is far from that.

The Greenblood also does not start in the mountains it is a coming together of the Scourge and the Vaith rivers and both these rivers start in the desert presumably from oasis that are there. Also where do you get it from that big ships can sail up the Greenblood, as far as i know the boats there are al poleboats not unlike the Shy Maid, so not very big at all.

[The Grey Wolf]

My opinion is that Dorne was indeed once able to raise 50K spears but that the Dornish Wars (particularly the First) and Daeron I's Conquest a la the Mongol invasions crippled the population and infrastructure such that as of ASOIAF they can only raise half those numbers. This, in my opinion, was further compounded by the Blackfyre Rebellions preventing Dorne from recovering fully and fits all the info we have.

If Dorne was once able to raise 50K spears it is much more believable for them to have defied the Targaryens the way they did. This can be seen in the fact the Fowlers alone were once able to raise 10K back when Dorne was not even unified and the fact that the First Vulture King was himself able to raise a host of 30K.

At the same time given the brutality of the First Dornish War and the Conquest of Dorne (not to mention the other unmentioned Dornish Wars) it is quite possible that Dorne experienced enough of a demographic shift such that in 300 AC Doran is not wrong when he says that Dorne is the weakest and least-populous of the 7K.

[Free Northman Reborn]

13 minutes ago, The Grey Wolf said:

My opinion is that Dorne was indeed once able to raise 50K spears but that the Dornish Wars (particularly the First) and Daeron I's Conquest a la the Mongol invasions crippled the population and infrastructure such that as of ASOIAF they can only raise half those numbers. This, in my opinion, was further compounded by the Blackfyre Rebellions preventing Dorne from recovering fully and fits all the info we have.

If Dorne was once able to raise 50K spears it is much more believable for them to have defied the Targaryens the way they did. This can be seen in the fact the Fowlers alone were once able to raise 10K back when Dorne was not even unified and the fact that the First Vulture King was himself able to raise a host of 30K.

At the same time given the brutality of the First Dornish War and the Conquest of Dorne (not to mention the other unmentioned Dornish Wars) it is quite possible that Dorne experienced enough of a demographic shift such that in 300 AC Doran is not wrong when he says that Dorne is the weakest and least-populous of the 7K.

Why the need for this hypothesis though?

Dorne was called the Empty Land by the Children way back in the Dawn Age. Doran makes it quite clear where the inflated numbers (presumably the 50k that is commonly stated to be their strength) originated from. It was from Daeron deliberately overstating their numbers to inflate the magnitude of his victory.

What need or evidence is there to suggest that their population has declined since then?

Most likely Daeron over estimated their strength a bit partly because on home ground even the Dornish peasants and women participated in guerrila attacks and sabotage, much like the Viet Kong did in Vietnam. So it was a total war by much of the population.

But that doesn't mean that they could raise those numbers as a formal army to go on the offensive.

I have no doubt that Dorne can raise 30k men. Perhaps even 35k. What is there as counter evidence to that? Doran didn't say they can only raise half the 50k. He just said that their numbers were over stated by Daeron.