[ADWD Spoilers] New info on the North's military strength

[laughing tree]

Also, I think Martin is going to resolve the Winterfell situation without bleeding more Northmen. The castle will be taken by subterfuge or betrayal from within, not through a siege.

The Northmen are now being saved for the battle against the Others. I thought that was the whole point of Martin repeatedly stressing how well the Northmen were dealing with being stuck in the snowstorm, compared to Stannis's pansies.

I agree. Remember that Theon is with Stannis (or otherwise still untaken by Ramsay, presuming for the sake of argument that Ramsay did in fact kill Stannis). Theon knows Winterfell better than anyone besides the Starks, having grown up there, and what's more, he's both captured and escaped from the castle. He also knows the state of morale inside Winterfell and something of the Bolton's plans. And he knows his name again. From a plot perspective, what better way to resolve his story than to have him try to fix what he broke?

[Lord Damian]

The North is like Russia in the sense that it takes a long time for it to bring all of its territory's fighting forces to one point. For its defense, the neck is easily defended when facing the South but the North, as proven in ASOFAI is highly vulunerable on coastal areas to raiders (think ironborn). In the past, the Greatjohn noted that large armies that tried to enter the North were easily thrown back at the Neck. The North never really was threatened seriously by anyone other than the Wildings but they had the wall. Then one day an incestious family showed up with dragons and their king knelt.

[tozka]

I thought the article was splendid, but it assumes that fantasy armies follow Earth's seasonal patterns. Since AGOT, Martin has suggested that the agricultural output offered by long summers allowed for harvests far larger than those in medieval Europe. Not only would that allow for a much larger population base (notwithstanding longer winters), but it would also lead to much larger stores of foodstuffs. Based on Jon's POVs in ADWD, we can assume that even the seemingly vast stocks of food in the Watch's food cellars is a paltry amount compared to the holdings of most lords - the Watch relies on donations and a small tax base in the Gift. The average Northern lord could probably hold many times that amount of food, enough to feed large armies through more than one campaigning season.

And you fail to consider that as there is a long summer where you can collect plenty of crops, there is a long winter where all this stored food disappears quite quickly. You cannot disregard longer winters, or any winter even that of 2 or 3 years can be a nightmare.

Many assumed that the numbers presented was by GRRM in the first 2 books are all the military of the regions but that's not really how is is. There is only so much that you can bring with you on foreign territory, there are certain logistics that cannot be ignored - paying, clothing, feeding, training, etc. all these soldiers.

[Galen M]

Many assumed that the numbers presented was by GRRM in the first 2 books are all the military of the regions but that's not really how is is. There is only so much that you can bring with you on foreign territory, there are certain logistics that cannot be ignored - paying, clothing, feeding, training, etc. all these soldiers.

Paying? They're not sellswords; they're feudal levies. Many of them come full clothed, armed, and trained, and why should they eat any more food than they'd eat at home?

[salmonprotocol34]

i believe that in the description of the 18k troops that rob took with him, that Cat made mention that they weren't all well trained nights, but many of them were common men with simple weapons. I could be wrong but i was under the impression that the north is very akin to Canada, it's population density and it's total population are not very large ... it is also a poorer region so they don't have as many knights with full armor and plate etc.

it seems to me that the north has toughness and grit and the south has the numbers and the flashy toys

[Black Crow]

Paying? They're not sellswords; they're feudal levies. Many of them come full clothed, armed, and trained, and why should they eat any more food than they'd eat at home?

Boots wear out, weapons and equipment get lost, stolen, damaged or sold, often to buy food or drink.

At home they are scattered around in farms, castles, villages and towns with an established food chain, whether its pulling carrots from the garden or going to market.

An army is a huge city on the move and needs to carry its food with it or forage. If its foraging it can't fight - or is vulnerable to being chewed up by an any which isn't dispersed looking for food. Its also eating bare everywhere it goes, burning everything that can't be eaten, polluting water supplies and generally impoverishing everybody it meets - and that's before it crosses into hostile territory. As to the carrying of food and other supplies that requires thousands of wagons and carts that ought to be keeping the domestic economy going, and tens of thousands of draught and pack animals and the men to look after them.

Going back to the Scottish armies I was talking about earlier the obligation (a pretty standard one in Europe) was forty days service from home. This often meant that by the time contingents from the far north of Scotland had reached the mustering point they had already consumed a fair proportion of the pay and provisions they'd started out with. Once those forty days were up there was then a straightforward choice, either the king took over responsibility for paying and feeding them or they were entitled to go home.

Running an army is a balancing act between how many men you can raise and how many you can actually afford to maintain.

[Galen M]

Boots wear out, weapons and equipment get lost, stolen, damaged or sold, often to buy food or drink.

snip

Running an army is a balancing act between how many men you can raise and how many you can actually afford to maintain.

Obviously there are plenty of expenses involved, but it's not like a modern army, where the host has pay for every aspect of the soldier's life: salary, room, board, equipment, training, etc.

Most soldiers come with their own arms and armor, and knights bring their own horses. Either way, it's that they are not paid any kind of salary, and the bannerman are all expected to contribute to the feeding of the army.

A modern army may expect to pay $1 million in initial expenses and then another 2-300k per year in expenses, plus benefits when they retire. Robb Stark would only have to incur a tiny fraction of those expenses.

[Hereward]

The thing that has always baffled, and irked, me is the almost complete absence of Stark troops, unless I am misremembering the earlier books. Whenever we hear about the army Robb took south, the description is of the various bannermen they belonged to. Now, we have various Northern lords being able to rustle up hundreds or thousands of new troops. But where are, or were, the Starks' own forces? Winterfell presumably supported a huge population in comparison to all of the other Northern fiefs, with the probable exception of White Harbor, but it has no army of its own.

Can anyone help me out?

[Markus]

The thing that has always baffled, and irked, me is the almost complete absence of Stark troops, unless I am misremembering the earlier books.

Most of the Stark troops must have been part of Robb's big army. They will have been led by unmentioned petty lords, landholders and sergeants.

There were also some individual mentions:

Rickard Stark took 200 men-at-arms with him to King's Landing and none returned. Ned took Jory Cassel and 50 men-at-arms with him and all but Harwyn are dead. Hallis Mollen probably led quite a lot of Winterfell's remaining guardsmen south and they were destroyed at the Red Wedding but for Mollen and those he chose to bring Ned's bones home. In ACoK Ser Rodrik also raises 600 men from Winterfell and environs to attack Dagmer Cleftjaw. They were part of the force which was later routed by Ramsay.

[Lummel]

Yes it's an interesting point.

The Ned takes fifty guardsmen south and there are maybe about two dozen in Winterfell when Theon captures it - maybe fewer. Then when Roderick Cassel raises an army to recapture Winterfell he has contingents from other Lords not just people from the Winterfell area.

I suppose it's possible that Robb sucked all the fighting strength out of the area or maybe the area is very thinly populated or too poor to provide many fighting men.

Some of these areas in the North will be scraping the barrel by ADWD with troops sent south with Robb, then assisting Roderick Cassel or lost fighting the Ironborn.

Other areas of the North seem to be uninhabited - that was Asha's point at the Kingsmoot, that there was empty land in the North available for settlement. Possibly with Ironborn raiding the west coast may well be less populated than the eastern areas anyway.

Ok Skagos, it's a big area but the reputation for cannibalism and the presence there of wild beasts that are extinct elsewhere suggests a fairly small population living subsistence lives.

But then Bolton and Manderly have still got enough men to be fighting each other over the Hornwood lands in ACOK and Ramsey doesn't have much trouble getting his five hundred together so you've got areas in the east that probably have more man power left or may have been more heavily populated to start with.

[Markus]

The Ned takes fifty guardsmen south and there are maybe about two dozen in Winterfell when Theon captures it - maybe fewer. Then when Roderick Cassel raises an army to recapture Winterfell he has contingents from other Lords not just people from the Winterfell area.

Just to be clear about the makeup of the Stark troops we saw:

• 
  
• 50 men-at-arms -- the cream of Winterfell's guard -- led by Jory Cassel, with Ned in King's Landing
  
• Winterfell guardsmen led by Hallis Mollen in Winterfell, later with Robb
  
• Stark levies led by various petty lords, landholders and sergeants, with Robb
  
• 600 guardsmen/levies from Winterfell and environs -- not other major lords -- led by Ser Rodrik to attack Dagmer Cleftjaw
  
• a token garrison left in Winterfell
  

[King_In_The_North]

I think that if Robb had another month to prepare, he could have mustered a total of 30-35k men.

[BladeDancer]

Davos was asked about the strength that Stannis had while being interviewed at White Harbor. He thought to himself that Stannis had gone North with fewer than 1500 men. Since then they have fought that battle against the Wildlings and the IronBorn at Deepwood Motte. They have also lost men to the cold. So Stannis has maybe 1000-1200 men remaining from his initial force.

[Markus]

After taking another look at Robb's army, the Starks really seem to have less men directly sworn to them than one might expect. When Robb left Winterfell he had about 12k troops. He had already been joined by levies from Houses Karstark, Bolton, Umber, Hornwood, Cerwyn, Glover, Tallhart and Mormont at this point.

The Karstarks and Boltons alone numbered 2.3k and probably 3-4k respectively. This probably left not more than 6.5k men for all the other Houses and the Starks' own troops. The Umbers seem to have raised easily more than half a thousand men in ADwD -- more than the Karstarks -- so I think their forces may be at least as strong as those of Karhold. With the Umbers possibly raising 2k men for Robb's army only 4.5k men would remain for the other forces.

If we were to assume that Hornwood, Cerwyn, Glover, Tallhart and Mormont each raised between 500-1000 men then their combined force would be 2.5-5k men. This leaves 0-2k Stark troops in Robb's army, suggesting that the Starks may well have raised less men than what seem to be their principal bannerhouses: Bolton, Karstark, Umber and Manderly.

ETA:

Once the Starks rule the North again and the Boltons are defeated it would be wise to parcel the holdings of the Boltons. They were clearly way too powerful when one looks at the size of their army with Robb and further considers that Ramsay still had a significant force of his own at the Dreadfort.

[noobilly]

After taking another look at Robb's army, the Starks really seem to have less men directly sworn to them than one might expect. When Robb left Winterfell he had about 12k troops. He had already been joined by levies from Houses Karstark, Bolton, Umber, Hornwood, Cerwyn, Glover, Tallhart and Mormont at this point.

The Karstarks and Boltons alone numbered 2.3k and probably 3-4k respectively. This probably left not more than 6.5k men for all the other Houses and the Starks' own troops. The Umbers seem to have raised easily more than half a thousand men in ADwD -- more than the Karstarks -- so I think their forces may be at least as strong as those of Karhold. With the Umbers possibly raising 2k men for Robb's army only 4.5k men would remain for the other forces.

If we were to assume that Hornwood, Cerwyn, Glover, Tallhart and Mormont each raised between 500-1000 men then their combined force would be 2.5-5k men. This leaves 0-2k Stark troops in Robb's army, suggesting that the Starks may well have raised less men than what seem to be their principal bannerhouses: Bolton, Karstark, Umber and Manderly.

ETA:

Once the Starks rule the North again and the Boltons are defeated it would be wise to parcel the holdings of the Boltons. They were clearly way too powerful when one looks at the size of their army with Robb and further considers that Ramsay still had a significant force of his own at the Dreadfort.

Quite true, I suppose that might explain why the Boltons managed to stand against the Starks for so long when it is clear that most of the houses of the North support the Starks strongly.

Rather strange that the Starks would have so few troops though, it's not like they are lacking land or anything.

[Free Northman]

Quite true, I suppose that might explain why the Boltons managed to stand against the Starks for so long when it is clear that most of the houses of the North support the Starks strongly.

Rather strange that the Starks would have so few troops though, it's not like they are lacking land or anything.

I think it is an oversight by Martin. There should be more Stark men than any of the lesser northern houses can muster. I would think 5000 Stark men, minimum, else it does not make sense.

[Hereward]

I'm glad I'm not alone then. It seemed odd to me that when we see forces sworn to the other major houses, it's described as being mostly Lannister or mostly Tyrells, supplemented by their sworn houses. With the Starks, there is almost no mention of actual Stark men when we hear about their army. I think it must be an oversight.

[Markus]

I suppose that might explain why the Boltons managed to stand against the Starks for so long when it is clear that most of the houses of the North support the Starks strongly.

What astounds me a little is that when one considers the rivalry between Bolton and Stark, the great military strength of the Boltons, Roose Bolton's public persona as a cold and cunning man and not least Ned apparently never trusting the man, that Catelyn actively encouraged Robb to give control of the greatest part of Robb's forces to Roose Bolton.

I mean, it was a sensible objection of Cat that Robb's plan to give the Greatjon command of his foot with Tywin as his opponent was too risky because the Greatjon is too aggressive. But there were other lords available who could've been given command.

In aGoT Ned entrusted the defense of Moat Cailin to Galbart Glover and Helman Tallhart, perhaps suggesting that he trusted in their loyalty and competence. Later Robb gives the garrison at the Twins to Helman Tallhart, a man he says he trusts and who is considered a good man by Catelyn. So perhaps Tallhart was considered to be competent and loyal and could've been given the command of Robb's foot.

If it wasn't politically expedient to give Tallhart command over seemingly more powerful lords then there would still have been Rickard Karstark. The Karstarks are among the most powerful northern Houses and are even considered kin to the Starks, so their power and pedigree should've been sufficient to command other lords. Karstark didn't seem untrustworthy in general or incompetent either. So he should've been a better option than Roose Bolton or the Greatjon at least.

Clearly the plot demanded that Bolton is given command but it also makes Cat look bad and Robb at least unwise for listening to Cat.

[mormont]

What astounds me a little is that when one considers the rivalry between Bolton and Stark, the great military strength of the Boltons, Roose Bolton's public persona as a cold and cunning man and not least Ned apparently never trusting the man, that Catelyn actively encouraged Robb to give control of the greatest part of Robb's forces to Roose Bolton.

Well, we know that Roose fought and presumably commanded significant forces during the Rebellion, though they may not have had the independence of command that Roose enjoyed in AGOT. It seems reasonable that if Ned trusted him to command men, though, that neither Robb nor Cat would immediately deem him unsuitable, particularly as I think the separation of forces wasn't intended to be as long-term as it turned out to be. Remember, Robb's whole agenda changes at Riverrun. At the time of the separation, the plan was presumably to lift the siege at Riverrun then head back in the direction of KL to free Ned, picking up Bolton's forces on the way.

Clearly the plot demanded that Bolton is given command but it also makes Cat look bad and Robb at least unwise for listening to Cat.

It's the other way round, actually. It's Robb's idea. Cat doesn't counsel him against it, that's true, but he is not 'listening to' her. He's choosing for himself.

[Markus]

Well, we know that Roose fought and presumably commanded significant forces during the Rebellion, though they may not have had the independence of command that Roose enjoyed in AGOT.

There is really no evidence that Bolton commanded any other forces than his own in Robert's Rebellion. Crucially, there is no evidence that Bolton ever commanded any independent force which outnumbered the regular force commanded by a Stark by at least 3 to 1. So one can't really take Bolton's role in Robert's Rebellion as evidence that Ned trusted Bolton to command men for him. In fact, we've reason to believe that Ned didn't trust the man. Jon seems to think as much in ADwD.

It's the other way round, actually. It's Robb's idea. Cat doesn't counsel him against it, that's true, but he is not 'listening to' her. He's choosing for himself.

Cat clearly guides Robb to pick Roose Bolton. When Robb suggests the Greatjon to take command Cat thinks: It was his first misstep, but how to make him see it without wounding his fledgling confidence? Later she counsels:"You want cold cunning, I should think, not courage." "Roose Bolton," Robb said at once.

Who do you think Cat had in mind when she advised "cold cunning"? Who do you think did she expect Robb to pick after her description? Note that Robb picked Bolton "at once".