How many wildlings and Westerosi are there?

[BinkyBonks]

The calculation I gave follows from the simple logic of saying that 5% of the population is participating in the war.

0.5% of the population fighting in the war is nothing and simply doesn't seem plausible on the basis of the text.

If the population of Westeros is really 50 million, then armies of tens of thousands can be made out of the "samurai caste" and there's no need to make mention of the peasants.

[Jaimeisnotazombie]

There are many Troops that havent been in battle yet. Lord Hightower is said to have ALOT of men, The Maesters of the Cit probably have some to protect them selves. The Vale, probably a few more smaller unscaved houses, like the Reeds.

[Bright Blue Eyes]

The calculation I gave follows from the simple logic of saying that 5% of the population is participating in the war.

0.5% of the population fighting in the war is nothing and simply doesn't seem plausible on the basis of the text.

If the population of Westeros is really 50 million, then armies of tens of thousands can be made out of the "samurai caste" and there's no need to make mention of the peasants.

Du hast recht und ich meine Ruhe.

Translating that in the right sentiment would be too difficult, I'll let it stand in German.

[Uncat]

Well said

[The Undead Martyr]

I have an issue with a South American sized continent (~70 times bigger than England) somehow having less than 40 million people, considering that Medieval England alone had anywhere between one and five million.

Westeros seems to be right in the middle of the middle ages; in fact, given the upcoming winter following a long, relatively peaceful summer, the population pre-war was probably at a record high; IIRC Catelyn mentions that there would be "more houses than before" in regards to Winterfell (or was it the Vale?) as the summer had been long. Maybe Westeros is getting a potential Greyscale Plague next summer?

Anyway, another thing that I can't fathom is why the Vale is so sparsely populated, at least density wise. Didn't Sansa think that the Vale was "vibrant and beautiful" and "even Highgarden's fruit" couldn't match it, or something? I mean, if the mountainous regions and smallish area lower the overall population, that's one thing, but I got the impression that density wise the Vale was second only to the Reach, if that; in fact, given the war's absence, it might have moved up already... there's probably a lot of potential levies "in reserve" i.e. the Vale, Dorne, "left behind" mountain clan men, the men held back by Manderly, etc. There's a reason that the fighting isn't over yet...

Of course, the big issue is not what a lord can field, but what he can support in the field, for how long, how quickly he can gather his men. These aren't professional armies but part time soldiers at best, and the sheer size of Westeros implies an extremely slow response time, even by Medieval standards. Add in the need to defend the homelands (in the south), the distances involved (North especially), the potentially cautious/apathetic vassal response (late lord Frey?) and constant slaughter and the need for food, and I don't have a big issue with <5% mobilization, especially given that Dorne and the Vale stayed out of it entirely and the Iron Islands were probably negligible numbers until Euron.

[romantic]

I think the distances mentioned in the book mean a significantly smaller continent than South America. Winterfell is stated as being 100 leagues from Deepwood Motte (mentioned when Stannis and his men are travelling from DM to WF). I think 1 league is 3 miles, so DM is 300 miles from WF. This is also roughly the same distance as the Wall and an east-west measurement of the Iron Islands. If the iron Islands are only 300 miles east-west and roughly 1/2 this distance north-south, then they are significantly smaller than Great Britain (to which they have been compared). BUT, if GRRM says he was thinking of a south-american sized continent, then the Iron Islands are much bigger. And if GRRM says it - it is so!

[Davos' fingertip]

the wildlings have personally dealt with the Others, and their numbers are needed at the wall because its lacking numbers. They will suely come of help so they do matter.

Without the wildlings, how would Jon manage to reopen all the castles and prepare for the Others?

[The Ghost of Winterfell]

If the wall is 300 miles long, then the Karstarks hold an area the size of England. Now, if a swarm of others arrived in medieval England in a twenty year long winter..... we should probably stop comparing Westeros to any known civilization in any time period. Estimates of population cannot be confirmed accurately until GRR tells us what is in his mind. Most likely he hasn't pondered it too long or hard due to the stories in affc.

[Jedi Master Hot Pie]

If the population of Westeros is 40 million, then why are there less than a thousand men on the Wall?

We know men who have committed major crimes are often sent there and sometimes minor lords or there sons will serve there as well. Why are the Night's Watch numbers so low then?

This is just another inconsistency in the texts and the estimates in this thread.

[The Undead Martyr]

Why would all of the "major criminals" immediately go to the Wall? Remember how the rapists that travel with Jon and Tyrion were given the choice of castration or the Wall? IIRC most chose the "knife" in Tyrion's terms, which says a lot about how the Wall is viewed by most people. I get the impression that the North is the only place that actually cares about the wall, if only because of the wildling raids.

The other possibility, IMO, is that both GRRM and the readers make a lot of subconscious assumptions, i.e. that both the size and scale of Westeros (year long winters, >1000 year dynasties, SA sized continents) result in a "larger than life" medieval England feel, which is why the population probably seems "off" to most people... as noted, the "low" estimates, emphasized by those who stick with narrative impressions rather than analytic and/or historical interpretations, mesh well with Middle Ages Britain.

[Jedi Master Hot Pie]

It seems to me that there are just a lot of inconsistencies between the text and the assumptions made on this board, and that nothing is set in stone until Martin says so himself.

[KING-OF-WINTERFELL]

So according to the estimates 2% of the population would serve in standing armies. So there should be 800,000 soldiers in Westeros, with 120,000 of those being from the North. Robb took 20,000 with him, and possibly another 50,000 are spread between the forces in Winterfell and the Northern lords. They are still missing 70,000 soldiers. Unless the population of the North is closer to 2.5 - 3 million. Also where are these 800,000 soldiers in Westeros, from the numbers being used in battle it seems more likely there are around 400,000 soldiers in Westeros, which means the population should only be 20 million people. Also this is considering standing armies, when Robb took his men south the harvests rotted in the fields. Which means they conscripted the peasants and farmers into the army. This is not adding up. It must be 40 million people in Westeros and Essos.

1. There are no standing armies only armed feudal service.

2. i think 2% is a rule of thumb, as different regions would have less efficient economies and government, i read somewhere france in the 1200's invaded aragon with 100,000 troops (largest medieval army mustered), by that time had france had a population around the 20 million mark excluding between 40,000 and 80,000 to look after castles, etc. therefore its around 220,000 short. also england (3-5 million) v france (17-20 million) during the hundreds years war comes to mind.

3. i believe that many sources say that the north is about tha size of medieval russia in which case that is an extremely conservative estimate, but westeros itself seems to be not that dense of a place.

[BlueEyedCrow]

When all is said and done, I believe that the wildlings are going to help repopulate the North. With the marriage of the new magnar of thenn to Alys Karstark, and the Karstark dissension/dissolution, their lands are ripe to be repopulated. Now the question remains is who and how amny wildlings are going to survive the imminent White Walker invasion?

[khal ulric]

Indeed, a 10 second Google search might be enough to satisfy an idiot who mistakes the phrase "breadbasket of" for a deep understanding of the economics of ancient Rome.

The initial claim was that Rome depended on Egypt and would have starved without its food supplies. If you have scholarly evidence supporting this claim, I'll be happy to take a look at it. Otherwise, I'm going to assume a retraction and apology.

It doesn't strike me as very compelling, because the Roman Republic once went to war with Egypt without starving, and managed to defeat Carthage even with the Mediterranean blockaded throughout most of that period. And besides, there's nothing in the story to suggest that King's Landing isn't receiving significant food imports from the Free Cities and elsewhere.

Superficial snarkiness about breadbaskets is hardly going to win the argument for you.

The battle is over. I have won.

first of pick a rome you want to compare anything with, the republic of romes capitol was not 1.5 million, it reached those numbers in the imperial period when egypt was firmly under the boot of imperial rule.

the first punic war carthage had a superior navy and they were losing that war badly untill they built a silly amount of ships and managed to defeat the carthaginian navy and relieve the siege of syracuse.

after that point they had the naval supremacy in the mediteranean. in the second punic war hanibal ravaged the italian country side for 20 years, is there any scenario under which rome could have survived without imports?

thirdly and maybe most importantly rome imported its food from sicily carthage and egypt, (as well as from other places) it is merely so that egypt is enourmously fertile and as such produced quite alot of grain.

besides using your math 30 thousand from dorne=5% its pop would still yield 600 thousand and even using dornes numbers that is the Lowest yield times 8 gives 10 million people and dorne is said to be the least populous by everyone so even as such your 10 million number is too low.

thou il grant you if you went by story 15-20 max is where you would wind up and by logic you be short 100 million compared to the 40 million number.

it is also worth noting that the 5% draft number is too high for most of the numbers, but at 0,5-1% (or even 2) it would not yield such bad effects (but then neither would 5%) but this could also be atributed to the difficulty in quickly raising an army in the north, most of those who went south came from the same place, besides the north must be able to fieldmore than 30 thousand which is dornes low estimate, so 18 000 cant be the entire norths army.

[The Bastard of Walton]

Not sure on exact numbers, but will be in desparate need of Daenerys army, when she arrives to stop the White Walkers.

[ClashOfTheAsh]

No, it really wouldn't.

But yes, it's a ludicrous population density. But guess what? I wasn't the guy who wrote the story and claimed that a large chunk of the peasantry is being drafted, and cities are being abandoned, so they can assemble an army of 20,000 men and boys.

Anyway, you can't simultaneously complain about (1) how I'm assuming a terribly low population density, and (2) how if I'm right there won't be enough food to go around to sustain the population density.

The battle is over. I have won.

Where in the book are cities abondoned to raise an army of 20,000 men and boys??

If you are refening to Robbs army it was a haistly raised Army of the best quicky available MEN in the immidate area of the lords Keeps. There where few boys in the Army. The only land left deserted in the North as stated in the books in Karhlod and Last Heart farmland and as explained abovethis does not mean the entire area contolled by Lord Karstark & Umber, but rather the land that is farmed directly for them within a close distance of there Keeps.

Indeed, a 10 second Google search might be enough to satisfy an idiot who mistakes the phrase "breadbasket of" for a deep understanding of the economics of ancient Rome.

The initial claim was that Rome depended on Egypt and would have starved without its food supplies. If you have scholarly evidence supporting this claim, I'll be happy to take a look at it. Otherwise, I'm going to assume a retraction and apology.

It doesn't strike me as very compelling, because the Roman Republic once went to war with Egypt without starving, and managed to defeat Carthage even with the Mediterranean blockaded throughout most of that period. And besides, there's nothing in the story to suggest that King's Landing isn't receiving significant food imports from the Free Cities and elsewhere.

Superficial snarkiness about breadbaskets is hardly going to win the argument for you.

The battle is over. I have won.

There is a very good explaination above by Khal Ulric explaining about the wars you speek of so i will say little about them.

You have however been talking about the Roman Empire in previous posts and now you have changed to the Republic?? These are two very diffrent 'machines'. Eqypt was indeed the bread basket of the Empire and before that it was bought under treaty from the Ptolemaic Kingdom in Egypt, while a supply was also maintained from sicily and north Africa.

[aryagonnakill]

Clash of Ash why you bother contradicting? Lol, as he said, he already won, your logical points are just clouding the issue.

[Kasporio]

Jeez, was always terrible im math.

So i won't argue about population's rate of fighters in the wars, but i remember the reach could field like 100000 soldiers and Dorne like 50000, quoted by Doran i guess, need confirmation.

But considering the cultural differences between the seven kingdoms, i could say the north and the iron islands are far more militaristic than others regions, and poorer too. Winterfel guards are often equiped with boiled leather, lannisters my mail heavy armor.

North, for example, seems to hold less noble houses. Populations under attacks from wildlings and ironborn rely on themselves for selfdefence. And the reach and westerlands would likely hold a high population of knights, with improved weapons and armors.

Great houses secluded in harsh areas (Arryn, Greyjoy, Stark) would likely be able to field far less men than tyrells or lannister.

2nd point : in a feudal system, nobles can chose who they'll serve, they will likely serve their overlord but can side with their ennemies.

Reluctant nobles can fulfil their oath by sending only few soldiers to serve their overlord. So did Barbrey dustin. Manderly forces, while they faithfully served in Robb Stark army, are still enough to be considered a worthy ally by Stannis. Bear island, clansmen and karstarks didn't send their main troops south.

Robb relied on the troops provided by the riverlands to wage war, and didn't take the best of north warriors south.

Considering the conflict in the riverlands, it was the battleground of 2 "foreign" armies. So the conscription rate here was more important than in other places.

The atrocities commited against the population was high, too.

So, there was more unwilling conscript there, while other armies were constituted mainly of volunteers, nobles and sellswords craving for plunder for the lannisters, bannermen seeking to free their overlord (at the begining) for the starks.

Moreover, the fact Stannis managed to add 4000 clansmen to his troops and crannogmen didn't took an active part in the conflict hint that north military strength remained important, unlike riverlands wich seems clearly exhausted.

Well, won't try to draw an exact census of the population who took an active part in the wars, but IMO the rate will be different for each place.

[FuriousGeorge]

I know this thread is pretty much dead but near the start people were saying stuff like 'go read a history book' as a way of saying 'your way of estimating the population of Westeros is completely wrong' but (actual) historians still have massive arguemnts when trying to estimate the population of places like early 20th century China or 19th century India or medieval England, even with the substantial amount of evidence available. I think it is fine to speculate about the population but when it gets to the stage that you are calling someone an idiot because they only think 1% of the population would have been in standing armies, but he thinks it was nearer 10% then you are really at the limits of how useful or relevant this discussion is. No one really knows what % of Westerosi were in standing armies, no one has any idea what the urbanisation rate was at this stage of Westerosi history or how many people died from fighting compared to those that died from hunger or disease. It is really going a bit far when you attempt to integrate these factors into an estimation of Westeros population and you should certainly not be invoking historical practice when doing so.

[mrlukeduke]

I think George has some wiggle room anyway if he wants to make it more historically realistic or whatever. I mean he can just add that Dorne actually has another 50,000+ elsewhere guarding cities, or that the Wall loses members to neighbouring towns or only sends for one or two prisoner collections a year and so it's basically been abandoned but for some petty help from the Starks once in a while, as a token gesture.

And so on. It's a fantasy after all, and the books can change, information can be added. Which is actually why I really like the fine details, aka "nitpicking". If George finds out about certain ideas like this (not that he reads the forums obviously, but through legitimate close sources), he can change bits n bobs here and there if he so desires. And then we're all winners. And if not, well, it was nerdishly fun discussing realistic economics and logistics anyway!