[SPOILERS] Military matters and population development (including cities)

[Free Northman Reborn]

4 minutes ago, Ran said:

Gyldayn mentions levies, so the numbers really are of what people are mustering. 

The numbers are what they are then. I don’t understand why they are so low, or why Cregan with 8000 men can threaten the entire realm, but I guess we just have to accept it. It makes the War of the Five Kings a conflict that dwarfs the Dance of the Dragons though, numbers wise.

[Ran]

4 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

The numbers are what they are then. I don’t understand why they are so low, or why Cregan with 8000 men can threaten the entire realm, but I guess we just have to accept it. It makes the War of the Five Kings a conflict that dwarfs the Dance of the Dragons though, numbers wise.

Dragons may be the answer. Everyone knows what happened at the Field of Fire. Combined with everything already noted, caution must have played a substantial role for everyone.

[Bernie Mac]

4 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

The numbers are what they are then. I don’t understand why they are so low, or why Cregan with 8000 men can threaten the entire realm, but I guess we just have to accept it. It makes the War of the Five Kings a conflict that dwarfs the Dance of the Dragons though, numbers wise.

They are not low, look at the military numbers in AFFC & ADWD, they are a fraction of what they were at the start of the war, plus Dance of the Dragons was a much longer war, with far more battles and unclear loyalties meaning lords would require larger garrisons given their neighbours could turn against them.

 

[Free Northman Reborn]

4 minutes ago, Bernie Mac said:

They are not low, look at the military numbers in AFFC & ADWD, they are a fraction of what they were at the start of the war, plus Dance of the Dragons was a much longer war, with far more battles and unclear loyalties meaning lords would require larger garrisons given their neighbours could turn against them.

 

Ok, so what were the numbers at the start of the Dance then? 20k from the North? 35k from the West? 20k from the Stormlands? 60k from the Reach? Maybe 20k from the Iron Isles? 30k from the Riverlands? Because that’s what we had in the WotFK. I haven’t seen anything even approaching those numbers mentioned in the context of the Dance.

So let’s accept the numbers were lower, and go with the reasons provided, such as dragons, divided loyalties etc.

[Bernie Mac]

7 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

Ok, so what were the numbers at the start of the Dance then? 20k from the North? 35k from the West? 20k from the Stormlands? 60k from the Reach? Maybe 20k from the Iron Isles? 30k from the Riverlands? Because that’s what we had in the WotFK. I haven’t seen anything even approaching those numbers mentioned in the context of the Dance.

So let’s accept the numbers were lower, and go with the reasons provided, such as dragons, divided loyalties etc.

I'll have to take your word for it, I started (and finished) the regency, will go onto Jaehaerys next and the Dance will likely be the last I read 

Now from the original novellas and world book GRRM makes it clear all the battles were not listed so, from those sources, it is impossible to say what the military numbers were at the start.

[Lord Varys]

17 minutes ago, Ran said:

Gyldayn mentions levies, so the numbers really are of what people are mustering. 

But not always, does he? I'd have to check that when I've the time. And perhaps he focuses more on *professionals* when he draws from Munkun ;-)?

A quick search shows that Gyldayn has 'levies' as a word in preparation for the Fishfeed, though no numbers are given:

Quote

More rivermen turned up the next day, led by Ser Garibald Grey, Lord Jon Charlton, and the new Lord of Raventree, the eleven-year-old Benjicot Blackwood. With their numbers augmented by these fresh levies, the queen’s men agreed that the time had come to attack. “Best make an end to these lions before the dragons come,” said Roddy the Ruin.

Later we have this, for a part of Addam Velaryon's host:

Quote

Benjicot Blackwood, the twelve-year-old Lord of Raventree, had come forth, as had the widowed Sabitha Frey, Lady of the Twins, with her father and brothers of House Vypren. Lords Stanton Piper, Joseth Smallwood, Derrick Darry, and Lyonel Deddings had scraped together fresh levies of greybeards and green boys, though all had suffered grievous losses in the autumn’s battles. Hugo Vance, the young lord of Wayfarer’s Rest, had come, with three hundred of his own men plus Black Trombo’s Myrish sellswords.

And then this for the preparation of the Kingsroad:

Quote

They were six days’ march from King’s Landing, moving down the kingsroad, when Lord Borros Baratheon led his stormlanders forth to meet them, his strength bolstered by levies from Stokeworth, Rosby, Hayford, and Duskendale, along with two thousand men and boys from the stews of Flea Bottom, hastily armed with spears and iron pot helms.

Here I think a pattern becomes clear. 'Levies' is not used to describe professional warriors/soldiers, but rather untrained auxiliary troops. We know that those men are not worth all that much as the coming battles show, and they are precisely mentioned as being present here to lead up to that climax.

Another example:

Quote

With the coming of spring, it was thought that the high road through the Mountains of the Moon would once again be passable. Five thousand men set out up the kingsroad, under the command of Ser Robert Rowan, Lord Thaddeus’s eldest son. Levies from Maidenpool, Darry, and Hayford swelled their numbers on the march, and once across the Trident they were joined by six hundred Freys and a thousand Blackwoods under Lord Benjicot himself, making them nine thousand strong entering the mountains.

Here we also have it made clear that those levies later joining are not part of the core army. 

In a funny context levies are also mentioned when Rogar Baratheon marches back home with his tail between his legs. He only has half the men he had when he marched to KL, the rest remained there. That strongly implies the men doing that are neither in Lord Baratheon's immediate service, nor in the service of his lords and landed knights. Else they would likely have a proper income back home - or at least a home that's preferable to Flea Bottom ;-).

But I'm sure there would also be instances where an army has just such and such men. Then we could not take this professional approach thing. But I think it is worth a try when we get it.

4 minutes ago, Bernie Mac said:

I'll have to take your word for it, I started (and finished) the regency, will go onto Jaehaerys next and the Dance will likely be the last I read.

Read TSotD again before the Jaehaerys stuff. Else you don't get the new material about Rhaena which is important to no small degree.

But interesting reading order, anyway.

[Ran]

Quote

'Levies' is not used to describe professional warriors/soldiers, but rather untrained auxiliary troops. We know that those men are not worth all that much as the coming battles show, and they are precisely mentioned as being present here to lead up to that climax.

The vast bulk of Westerosi armies are levied, and a "levy" of troops can end up numbering the professionals among them who are leading them. Here's how Catelyn describes the Manderlys marching with her to Moat Cailin:

 

Quote

Ser Wylis and his brother Ser Wendel followed, leading their levies, near fifteen hundred men: some twenty-odd knights and as many squires, two hundred mounted lances, swordsmen, and freeriders, and the rest foot, armed with spears, pikes and tridents.

 I don't think George intends Gyldayn and Munkun to be using atypical language. When we have "levies" joining from Maidenpool, Darry, and Hayford, do you suppose it's a bunch of untrained guys pointed in a direction? Or is it meant to convey that knights and men-at-arms were leading them, and also joining the army?

I think the real answer to most of the small numbers are as I said: the deep divisions over who was rightful ruler, the fear that one's closest vassals might betray you, and the fear of dragons falling upon a large host. Possibly this last fact led to some of these armies actually being predominantly "professional" on the belief that only the most disciplined forces could withstand dealing with the threat of dragons, and would also be more mobile and orderly on the march.

But when we're told 6,000 gather here or 8,000 are brought here, I think we're to take it that those were the troops that were expected to fight, levied and otherwise, unless the composition of that force is explicitly only knights and men-at-arms.

[SeanF]

Huge armies were not the norm in any pre-industrial society.  That's because of the difficulty of provisioning and equipping huge numbers of men who were gathered in a small area, and because of the difficulties of controlling large numbers of men on the battlefield when communications were so primitive.

Even when States had big overall numbers of troops (like the Roman Empire) the number fighting in any one battle would rarely exceed 20,000 per side.

[Lord Varys]

2 hours ago, SeanF said:

Huge armies were not the norm in any pre-industrial society.  That's because of the difficulty of provisioning and equipping huge numbers of men who were gathered in a small area, and because of the difficulties of controlling large numbers of men on the battlefield when communications were so primitive.

I know that, and I actually prefer the numbers of the Dance. It is just not really something that fits well with the way military matters are dealt with in ASoIaF.

If Gyldayn had cited Munkun or had himself given more or less the reasoning Ran gives, things would be more clear. We should not be the ones doing interpretations to those names.

Especially in light of the fact that the Riverlands - which are really ravaged during this war - really seem to be able/willing to marshal most of the fighting men, fighting in most of the battles, whereas the likes of the Stormlands, the Vale, and even the West (before Dalton's attack) had no real reason to keep many men behind.

After all, where the lord paramount, his bannermen followed. In the Reach and the Riverlands they lead nowhere (for most of the time) and thus things were unclear there. If Rhaenyra had been joined by Stormlanders and Westermen dissenters on Dragonstone or KL, or if Vale lords and Northmen had shown up at Aegon II's court we would have a point.

But as it stands it is just an idea that the lords deliberately kept men behind. I don't find it that bad, I just find it would have been great if Gyldayn had mentioned it.

And I think we can all agree there.

2 hours ago, Ran said:

I don't think George intends Gyldayn and Munkun to be using atypical language. When we have "levies" joining from Maidenpool, Darry, and Hayford, do you suppose it's a bunch of untrained guys pointed in a direction? Or is it meant to convey that knights and men-at-arms were leading them, and also joining the army?

It would depend on the men, I guess. But in case of the Vale campaign or the Kingsroad it really seems there was a core army raised by the actual commanders and then other lords sent additional (and not necessarily high quality) men, or landed knights and petty lords from those lands decided to would want a part in the campaign, raised their own men from their lands and joined them.

But I think we should actually go back and check how often Gyldayn gives us men of an army, and how often he just gives knights/lords, archers and men-at-arms. In armies described only as such - and us adding the numbers - it is by no means a given that this would be the full size of the army, is it not?

[SeanF]

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

 

It would depend on the men, I guess. But in case of the Vale campaign or the Kingsroad it really seems there was a core army raised by the actual commanders and then other lords sent additional (and not necessarily high quality) men, or landed knights and petty lords from those lands decided to would want a part in the campaign, raised their own men from their lands and joined them.

But I think we should actually go back and check how often Gyldayn gives us men of an army, and how often he just gives knights/lords, archers and men-at-arms. In armies described only as such - and us adding the numbers - it is by no means a given that this would be the full size of the army, is it not?

"Levies" were probably of very variable quality.  Lots of people in medieval societies knew how to handle weapons, and were used to fighting in formation, without being professional soldiers.  So, on the one hand, you'd get green boys and greybeards armed with sharpened sticks, but on the other, fairly wealthy peasants who were familiar with longbows and spears.

[Ran]

Not to put too fine a point on it, but 

Quote

 I just find it would have been great if Gyldayn had mentioned it.

could as well be said about the idea that Munkun only bothered to list "professionals". It would be utterly unlike anything else in George's work, and you'd think it'd be a "quirk" Gyldayn would bring up....

So that's a bit of a wash. I'm sure once everyone has more time to look at it, there'll be more discussion, but right now I think I feel comfortable with the idea that people were just too uncertain about things to commit enormous numbers, and the dragons were just too frightening. If I recall correctly, the single largest force gathered during the Dance is Hightower's 20,000, and that's only after Prince Daeron and his dragon joined him and helped him bring some of the local oppositon who had been mopping up with him to heel.

[SeanF]

On ‎11‎/‎20‎/‎2018 at 11:29 PM, Lord Varys said:

Oh, I don't doubt that later numbers might go down and up again, but we have also the long period of peace and prosperity under Aerys the Wise, and no great calamity in KL during the reign of Robert the Glorious either, so this is 35 years of peace and plenty of the Kingslanders, aside from the Sack. But I think Tywin's dogs only butchered thousands of townsfolk, perhaps tens of thousands, but not hundreds of thousands.

Keep in mind that the Shivers ravaged not only Westeros at large but especially KL and Oldtown very hard during Jaehaerys I's reign (Oldtown, for which we have numbers there, supposedly lost a quarter of its population) yet KL still quadrupled its population between 48 AC and 103 AC.

The Great Spring Sickness was bad, but I'm not sure it was as worse as the Shivers or the Winter Fever yet. We'll have to wait and see. However, there is no indication for great calamities hitting KL after 209 AC, and especially the reign of Maekar seems to have been a time of peace and prosperity.

I expect there to have been 600,000 to perhaps even 800,000-900,000 people to have been there in 129 AC, after another thirty years of peace and plenty.

Afterwards, Aegon III may not have been all that great for trade or parties or anything, and Daeron's Dornish War could have also have had a bad effect on KL. But Baelor pretty much made it a feast to live in his city, with free bread and all, so numbers should have risen exponentially during his reign. And it was only four out of ten in KL during the Great Spring Sickness. Once the calamity is over, opportunity comes. Many people inherited a lot of stuff, many houses are empty. Outsiders can come in and make careers where there was no opportunity before, etc.

If Kings Landing were a typical medieval capital city, its death rate would greatly exceed its birthrate.  Diseases like smallpox, influenza, cholera would probably carry off huge numbers of people.  The city would depend on constant immigration to maintain or increase its numbers.  So, its numbers probably fluctuated sharply.

[Ran]

I was looking at it again, and a recollection I had is correct: the walls of King's Landing, and its gates, are fixed by the time of Jaehaerys (there are references to the modern gates such as the Lion Gate, King's Gate, etc.).

There is literally no room inside of KL for it to grow much beyond what we see in the novels. And for whatever reason, there is not some extensive suburb surrounding the walls, requiring their own walls, etc. Artists have depicted small villages at times, huddled around the gates, but they aren't connected, presumably because of a deliberate policy to try and keep the walls clear for defensive purposes. We see what happens when they aren't clear in ACoK... I suppose any time King's Landing was threatened, a similar action was taken.

The rest of Westeros may well have continued growing after Jaehaerys's day, but I think KL seems to have been deliberately capped in size.

[SeanF]

4 minutes ago, Ran said:

Not to put too fine a point on it, but 

could as well be said about the idea that Munkun only bothered to list "professionals". It would be utterly unlike anything else in George's work, and you'd think it'd be a "quirk" Gyldayn would bring up....

So that's a bit of a wash. I'm sure once everyone has more time to look at it, there'll be more discussion, but right now I think I feel comfortable with the idea that people were just too uncertain about things to commit enormous numbers, and the dragons were just too frightening. If I recall correctly, the single largest force gathered during the Dance is Hightower's 20,000, and that's only after Prince Daeron and his dragon joined him and helped him bring some of the local oppositon who had been mopping up with him to heel.

Overall, the number of people who fought must have been enormous, even if none of the individual armies was enormous.  And, plenty of people fought at sea, too.

[Lord Varys]

1 hour ago, Ran said:

Not to put too fine a point on it, but 

could as well be said about the idea that Munkun only bothered to list "professionals". It would be utterly unlike anything else in George's work, and you'd think it'd be a "quirk" Gyldayn would bring up....

The discrepancy we discuss creeps in because the numbers are pretty high (Wars of Conquest, when the armies face the three largest dragons in the world), considerable lower during the Dance (despite the population growth during the reign of the Old King and, very likely, the reign of Viserys I as well), and then higher again in the main series - the explanation we need is for that.

If there was a motivation for the lords to deliberately hold men back then a historian could and should have mentioned that - but if the general methodology of a historian of the Citadel were to mostly refer to professional soldiers (who definitely are the men Gyldayn references the most) then he would not necessarily explain that to his learned and informed audience. Or so one can rationalize that ;-).

Our guys giving us numbers in the main series are not historians of the Citadel. They very often mention just numbers of men or even camp fires, never mind their quality and profession. This is not always the case, of course, but we really don't learn often how many archers or men-at-arms marched with this or that army. The first time archers were explicitly mentioned as a crucial and important part of an army was with the Golden Company in ADwD, where we also get specific numbers on them.

1 hour ago, Ran said:

So that's a bit of a wash. I'm sure once everyone has more time to look at it, there'll be more discussion, but right now I think I feel comfortable with the idea that people were just too uncertain about things to commit enormous numbers, and the dragons were just too frightening. If I recall correctly, the single largest force gathered during the Dance is Hightower's 20,000, and that's only after Prince Daeron and his dragon joined him and helped him bring some of the local oppositon who had been mopping up with him to heel.

And I don't disagree with your assessment there. We have Elmo Tully's reluctance to commit himself, we have Jeyne Arryn looking more to her own defenses and demanding dragonriders for that, etc. 

It is just that a couple of sentences explaining the strategies and tactics of certain lords - or a majority of them - could have made that more clear. After all, on the hand we have men going to great lengths to show their devotion and determination. Just think of Lord Walys Mooton's mad quest, or the Storming of the Dragonpit.

As for KL:

My point just was that KL as seen in the main series doesn't seem to be too crowded. There may have been a time when they had another 100,000 in the city. Perhaps, perhaps not.

[Ran]

The whole issue of the Conquest is that no one in Westeros had fought dragons before, and they all tried different ways of doing it. Hide in your castle? Get burned. Try a huge army? Get roasted. Raise a fleet to prevent them landing? See them burn. The Dornish learned from their predecessors... and the rest of Westeros as well. In the post-dragons era, army sizes grow because the nuclear weapon that are dragons are gone. This becomes even more of an issue in the Dance because it's not just one or two dragons to worry about, but many of them, on both sides.

I think the King's Landing of the novels is actually described as quite crowded. It's not really handling the influx of refugees, it's incredibly sensitive to disturbance in the food supply, buildings are described as so crowded together that people on the fourth floor can shake hands with the person in the house next to them because the houses are overgrowing the alleyways and streets.

[Lord Varys]

2 minutes ago, Ran said:

The whole issue of the Conquest is that no one in Westeros had fought dragons before, and they all tried different ways of doing it. Hide in your castle? Get burned. Try a huge army? Get roasted. The Dornish learned from it... and the rest of Westeros as well. In the post-dragons era, army sizes grow because the nuclear weapon that are dragons are gone. This becomes even more of an issue in the Dance because it's not just one or two dragons to worry about, but many of them, on both sides.

But they all must have known that Aegon Targaryen had three insanely huge and powerful dragons, right? The very idea you could kill those flying beasts with armies is strange from the start.

And, yeah, dragons aplenty should make things more confused and dangerous - we should look how well this general idea fits with the way people actually act. Borros doing basically nothing for most of the war certainly can be seen in that light.

2 minutes ago, Ran said:

I think the King's Landing of the novels is actually described as quite crowded. It's not really handling the influx of refugees, it's incredibly sensitive to disturbance in the food supply, buildings are described as so crowded together that people on the fourth floor can shake hands with the person in the house next to them because the houses are overgrowing the alleyways and streets.

Didn't Yandel imply that KL outgrew Oldtown population-wise in recent years? If so, then there must have been some growth still after Jaehaerys I.

[Free Northman Reborn]

Jason Lannister gathered what Galdayn calls “a formiddable host”  of 1000 knights and seven times as many archers and men at arms. So 8,000 men in total. And the passage then describes it as “Lord Jason descended from the Western hills with all his power” or something along those lines.

That’s pretty much the largest host mentioned in the Dance from what I can see, after Cregan’s northern army.

The Hightowers raised 5000 men on their own, and it apparently dwarfed the combined host of the Tarly’s and a couple of other Reach lords who lined up against them. When the 5000 are defeated it is seen as a devestating blow to the Greens.

So again, 5000 is seen as a massive force during the Dance, 8000 is described as Lord Lannister descending on the Riverlands with “all his power”, and Cregan’s host of between 8,000 and 20,000 northmen is treated pretty much as an unstoppable horde of unmatched power.

Really different scale from either the Conquest 130 years before or the WotFK 170 years later.

Edit

Just found the “great southron host” of Ormund Hightower that numbered more than 20000 as it crept slowly up the Mander towards Kings Landing.  It invokes images if Renlys vast army, but only a third as large.

[Ran]

Hightower's host hits 20,000 after Daeron joins him and they whip some of the other armies into shape and have them join his forces. That's the biggest single force. 

Cregan's host is 8k. FFS, Cregan only promises "10,000" earlier, so why would it be 20,000? Eustace was freaking out for religious reasons.

[Free Northman Reborn]

9 minutes ago, Ran said:

Hightower's host hits 20,000 after Daeron joins him and they whip some of the other armies into shape and have them join his forces. That's the biggest single force. 

Cregan's host is 8k. FFS, Cregan only promises "10,000" earlier, so why would it be 20,000? Eustace was freaking out for religious reasons.

Not there yet, Ran. I only just found Ormund’s 20k host, as per my edit above. The Dance is a fairly taxing read, so I’ve jumped back and forth trying to find useful parts. Haven’t even read Eustace’s reference to Cregan’s host yet. Getting there.