which great house can field the largest army?

[LordFirkraag]

During the Napoleonic are, streets were much better. The cities were way larger, creating the need for an infrastructure for distributing food never seen in the Middle Ages. Farmers produced much more food on vastly less land. Bureaucracy was much better.

The Grande Armee marched in several columns and was distributed over pretty much all of Europe. And they starved to death.

I think the quality of streets is entirely besides the point here. It takes a FEW HOURS to walk from one end of a city to the other. The hard part is traversing the countryside, not the streets in a city.

And yes, you're right about bureaucracy. That reinforces my point about the rise of nationalism and the introduction of conscription. These things would have been impossible without an advanced bureaucracy whose presence was felt by smallfolk in even remote parts of the countryside. On the other hand, developing an apparatus for military logistics, when you've had thousands of years of practice, doesn't seem like it would obviously require a complex social, governmental and legislative apparatus together with the idea and the feeling of a nation.

[Bright Blue Eyes]

I think the quality of streets is entirely besides the point here. It takes a FEW HOURS to walk from one end of a city to the other. The hard part is traversing the countryside, not the streets in a city.

And yes, you're right about bureaucracy. That reinforces my point about the rise of nationalism and the introduction of conscription. These things would have been impossible without an advanced bureaucracy. On the other hand, developing an apparatus for military logistics, when you've had thousands of years of practice, doesn't seem like it would obviously require a complex social, governmental and legislative apparatus together with the idea and the feeling of a nation.

Well, (country) roads. English is a foreign language for me, sometimes I use the wrong word.

And you could easily discuss your second hypothesis with reality. Apparently it does.

[Borsabil]

I don't think it's logistics that's the primary reason. In the Napoleonic wars, railways hardly existed. Armies didn't have to lug heavy armour around, but they did have to lug massive artillery. So there's no reason to think that in logistics they were in a much different position from the Middle Ages. Yet in the Napoleonic wars, the Grand Armée reached 600,000 men at its peak, which dwarfs any army of the Middle Ages.

Edit: You mentioned canned food. That invention was huge, I agree; although the project was just getting off the ground in the Napoleonic wars and I'm not sure it's considered to have played a major role. At least I've never seen any history book adduce canned food as the primary reason for the vastly increased army size in the Napoleonic wars. Of course, it definitely did play a big role in WW1, when army strength reached millions

I don't think it's logistics that's the primary reason. In the Napoleonic wars, railways hardly existed. Armies didn't have to lug heavy armour around, but they did have to lug massive artillery. So there's no reason to think that in logistics they were in a much different position from the Middle Ages. Yet in the Napoleonic wars, the Grand Armée reached 600,000 men at its peak, which dwarfs any army of the Middle Ages.

Edit: You mentioned canned food. That invention was huge, I agree; although the project was just getting off the ground in the Napoleonic wars and I'm not sure it's considered to have played a major role. At least I've never seen any history book adduce canned food as the primary reason for the vastly increased army size in the Napoleonic wars. Of course, it definitely did play a big role in WW1, when army strength reached millions

Funny you should mention the Napoleonic wars and canned food, it was the need to feed the Grand Armee that spurred the invention, originally through heating food in hermetically sealed glass jars, and later in tin containers.

Napoleon was utterly focused on logistics, he was also a genius tactician of course, but he was the guy who coined the phrase "an army marches on it's stomach". But despite all his efforts he found to his cost the result of taking a massive army into hostile territory with poor communication and a lack of logistical support.

Rome fielded legions roughly the size we speak of.

Of course they had paved roads, professional soldiers, and uber bureaucracies to handle their logistics.

The largest the Roman army ever got was 450,000 men, around half of whom were auxiliaries. An enormous number, but remember they were not one united force, they were split up into a large number of legions scattered throughout an enormous empire. So really the point remains valid, even with the incredible organizational abilities of the Romans, which remain unmatched in pre-industrial societies, they were still unable to put to the field a single army of more than a few tens of thousands of men.

[Victarion Chainbreaker]

Targaryen.

They may be scattered, but House Targaryen has by far the largest force: The Unsullied, the Khalasar, The Golden Company, the Wildings, and considering how well the GNC goes, the entirety of the North.

[LordFirkraag]

Well, (country) roads. English is a foreign language for me, sometimes I use the wrong word.

And you could easily discuss your second hypothesis with reality. Apparently it does.

It's not only your understanding of the English language that's flawed: so is your understanding of history.

For example, the armies in the ancient Rome were vastly bigger than those in the Middle Ages. This had everything to do with nationalism and the ability of bureaucracies to make their presence felt by peasants. It had nothing to do with canned food.

You also fail to grasp the point that Roman roads were developed in response to the problem of transporting huge numbers of troops. Past about 1300, the kingdoms of the Middle Ages were actually ahead of ancient Rome in engineering knowledge and technology advancement and could easily have worked out how to repair the Roman roads if they needed to. They didn't need to because, as the history books TELL us, kings could only afford to maintain an army in the tens of thousands.

Even as late as the mid-17th century, when technology was far more advanced than in the classical period, King Charles I could scarcely afford an army of 20,000 men to raise against the Scots. It had nothing to do with logistics and everything to do with the ability of Charles to PAY his soldiers. Nationalism as we know it didn't exist and these men were not going to stick out their necks unless he paid them.

[BericDondarrion]

I don't buy for one second the North has some huge vast army. Robb brought 20k with him. There were 3500 mountain clansmen Stannis recruited and Ser Rodriks army was what, 1200 strong when it went to retake WF? The North has 25 maybe 30 thousand soldiers at best.

[LordFirkraag]

Funny you should mention the Napoleonic wars and canned food, it was the need to feed the Grand Armee that spurred the invention, originally through heating food in hermetically sealed glass jars, and later in tin containers.

I know that and I indicated as much by saying that the technology was just getting the ground in the Napoleonic war.

The technology WAS NOT widespread in that war. It was only in the initial stages. Go to the Wiki and read about it.

So really the point remains valid, even with the incredible organizational abilities of the Romans, which remain unmatched in pre-industrial societies, they were still unable to put to the field a single army of more than a few tens of thousands of men.

I would argue that the organizational ability of the Romans allowed them to recruit far more effectively than kingdoms of the Middle Ages. Equally vital was the spirit of nationalism. As we know from Edward Gibbon, the weakening in nationalism actually lead to the decline and fall of the Roman empire. I daresay logistics were just as effective in 378 AD as they were 50 BC. It was ideology that changed.

Anyway...all of this is moot. You just have to read the history of the Middle Ages to see that kings were constrained largely by money, not by logistics.

[Gurkhal]

The problem: From the very start of the Ironborn invasion to the Battle of Winterfell are a mere eight weeks and Rodrik spends most of it on the march. First to Torrhen's Square, than back again, at a hurry. He never had the time to recruit more men. He took what was available in Winterfell and on the way, but that's it.

He'd have to send couriers into the backwaters to get a larger army, which takes months one-way already.

Eight weeks is still some degree of time. Time enough for ser Rodrick to march to Torrhen's Square to lift a siege, get news about Winterfell, go back and gather and army from various Houses and even for Ramsay to get to the Dreadfort and back again. And while riders may take their sweet time, ravens can fly faster and there's plenty of places in the North that have maesters. But he didn't, and he does not need to be present, just give the orders own his own authority - just like he interfered in the civil war between Bolton and Manderly over the Hornwood lands. So either Rodrick isn't at all what he's cranked up to be - given that the Starks are facing a two-front war and he does not even get the idea to expand the force available but that could also be Robb's lack of understanding for the power of his own realm or they both knows that are not all that many soldiers that can be recruited.

And even more telling should be that Robb never, to my knowledge, gave order to raise a substantial number of Northern troops even when he was facing an increasingly difficult situation. That could of course be that he underestimated the odds stacked against him but I'm more inclined to think that he didn't really have all that many men to turn into soldiers.

[Bright Blue Eyes]

It's not only your understanding of the English language that's flawed: so is your understanding of history.

For example, the armies in the ancient Rome were vastly bigger than those in the Middle Ages. This had everything to do with nationalism and the ability of bureaucracies to make their presence felt by peasants. It had nothing to do with canned food.

You also fail to grasp the point that Roman roads were developed in response to the problem of transporting huge numbers of troops. Past about 1300, the kingdoms of the Middle Ages were actually ahead of ancient Rome in engineering knowledge and technology advancement and could easily have worked out how to repair the Roman roads if they needed to. They didn't need to because, as the history books TELL us, kings could only afford to maintain an army in the tens of thousands.

Even as late as the mid-17th century, when technology was far more advanced than in the classical period, King Charles I could scarcely afford an army of 20,000 men to raise against the Scots. It had nothing to do with logistics and everything to do with the ability of Charles to PAY his soldiers. Nationalism as we know it didn't exist and these men were not going to stick out their necks unless he paid them.

Interesting opinion. You bring either my own points, points I don't dispute, or wrong statements (army sizes). Whatever...

Eight weeks is still some degree of time. Time enough for ser Rodrick to march to Torrhen's Square to lift a siege, get news about Winterfell, go back and gather and army from various Houses and even for Ramsay to get to the Dreadfort and back again. And while riders may take their sweet time, ravens can fly faster and there's plenty of places in the North that have maesters. But he didn't, and he does not need to be present, just give the orders own his own authority - just like he interfered in the civil war between Bolton and Manderly over the Hornwood lands. So either Rodrick isn't at all what he's cranked up to be - given that the Starks are facing a two-front war and he does not even get the idea to expand the force available but that could also be Robb's lack of understanding for the power of his own realm or they both knows that are not all that many soldiers that can be recruited.

And even more telling should be that Robb never, to my knowledge, gave order to raise a substantial number of Northern troops even when he was facing an increasingly difficult situation. That could of course be that he underestimated the odds stacked against him but I'm more inclined to think that he didn't really have all that many men to turn into soldiers.

To get the info from Torrhen's Square, to gather the levies in Winterfell and Castle Cerwyn, march to Torrhen's Square (which takes two weeks at the very least, straight line), get the news about Winterfell, march back, gathering up the reinforcements already on the way, and die. Ramsay had his 600 in the Dreadfort, ready to march on a moment's notice.

There are about 15 ravenries in the North, give or take. It's no coincidence that I choose an example from Last Hearth to "Backwater Village". Because Last Hearth is a typical ravenry-possessing castle - and the only one in the Umber lands.

And yes, Rodrick isn't what he is cranked up to be - for plot reasons. The attack on Winterfell is the weakest part of the entire series by a fair margin.

Robb never gave orders to raise a substantial amount of Northern troops, because he was facing a simple situation at first and lost his control over the North the exact moment it turned difficult. He wasn't fighting a two-front war before as well.

[thelittledragonthatcould]

Robb never gave orders to raise a substantial amount of Northern troops, because he was facing a simple situation at first and lost his control over the North the exact moment it turned difficult. He wasn't fighting a two-front war before as well.

It was not simple. Robb had no idea about the splintered realm down South, the information he had was that he was heading down South to face Joffrey Baratheon, the rightful heir, and had no idea that his Uncles were plotting against him.

Even with the Freys 4,000 he does not feel he can match Tywins main force and threatens the Greatjon's lands when he suggests that he will withdraw his Umber troops. Robb needed all the troops he could muster even if it threatened the farming of the last crops(Winter is coming?) and the security of many of his settlements.

[Bright Blue Eyes]

It was not simple. Robb had no idea about the splintered realm down South, the information he had was that he was heading down South to face Joffrey Baratheon, the rightful heir, and had no idea that his Uncles were plotting against him.

Even with the Freys 4,000 he does not feel he can match Tywins main force and threatens the Greatjon's lands when he suggests that he will withdraw his Umber troops. Robb needed all the troops he could muster even if it threatened the farming of the last crops(Winter is coming?) and the security of many of his settlements.

Yes. At this time, additional troops would have been beneficial, but couldn't come in time (nor be fed). I'm talking about the period between the Whispering Wood and the Ironborn Invasion.

And no one ever could match Tywins main force at Harrenhal. The castle is just too much of a force multiplier.