City-States

[Loonook]

Thanks, everyone! Keep the info rolling! I've been reading up on Greek City states, and will check into the medieval German free towns, as well.

I run an E6 campaign, so only up to 3rd level magic, and low prevalence of magic items. I'm intending the city-state region to be located on a LARGE island (say 300 by 900 miles or more) in a subtropical climate. It is somewhat isolated from the mainland, but not absolutely; sea traffic is seasonal and depends on the frequency of storms, pirates and sea-monsters...

Well then. There aren't really any magic items or other ways to build... So we're kind of hosed on that side.

Now it is a matter of figuring out your economy. Pretty easy to do if you take into account the City State as a whole. For the purposes of our discussion we need to figure out a way to extrapolate the demographic data of a standard D&D game... Into your population as a whole. There are two ways to do that:

1.) Roll the individual population centers as cities... And their variations...
2.) Roll the population as a whole in blocks based on the model.

Personally I would go with #2 to save yourself some hassle. As you're running E6 you would be dealing with the concept that all/most 'off-screen' individuals are lvl. 1. This is pretty much the same as D&D, and would helps us to focus on the numbers available.

270000 Square Miles. 172 800 000 acres. That's the acreage across your proposed island. Overall population density is... around 5.5/square mile across the entire island. Medieval population densities are rough, but we can pull this information here to cover our rough numbers. 40-100/sq mile for population centers.

We have 30 50k blocks to distribute, so if we do a distribution across the various densities...

PD 40 - 100 000 (2)
PD 50 - 150 000 (3)
PD 60 - 200 000 (4)
PD 70 - 600 000 (12)
PD 80 - 200 000 (4)
PD 90 - 150 000 (3)
PD 100 - 100 000 (2)
___

Gives us an overall density of 70/sq mile. That puts the overall populated land at 21428 sq miles if everything is populated in such a way. Of course that doesn't take into account the amount of land needed for the upkeep of these individuals.

In a previous thread we came up with a rough approximation of 20 acres/3 adult 'units' (2 individuals, 2 children), with 4.6 acres of arable land for crops beyond the needs of the individual.

We have a rough mark of 27% for the current global under 15 population. This is my benchmark for first level per the minimum age of human 'adulthood' for humans in D&D being 16.

So overall we have 405000 'child units' and 1095000 adult units. Overall requirements in AU? 1297500.

19,981,500 acres needed to support a peasant lifestyle. Around 31221 sq miles for agricultural support.

A minimum of 52649 sq miles of the island is populated. This makes the city state somewhere between the sizes of Alabama and Arkansas total area, excluding water features. Those states have an average water coverage of 2%.

Total sustaining size of the city state: 53701 square miles. If the state was a perfect square you could cover it on foot in 10 days from edge to edge.

Of course, your citystate must produce... Something right? I mean, the sheer amount of laborers and farmers in most medieval societies will approach 80%, and we need arable land to work on.

With laborers/farmers available? We have quite a large workforce. If we take all of those laborers into the field we would still have plenty of Experts and Commoners to work in the cities, and do their thing. Taking into account the previous 4.6 usable acres/3 AU household, we could look into the fit adults who do the farmwork.

80% of fit adults comes to 876000 individuals. If we take a similar amount of children into the fields (324000) we will have 1840000 acres of land under the plow for produce. These individuals are doing the additional work of agricultural support for those in the cities, so we have a total arable land of 21,821,500 acres, or 34096 sq miles of farmland, and a total 56,576 sq miles for the city state.

Wanna see the numbers for available materials? Well, I calculated based on taxes, craftsmen/non-farm labor, and taxation on total farmland production, and both excluding government farming and including government farming. The first series of numbers takes into account that the government only collects taxes rather than owning a means of production like a feudal lord would, and that the average of non-farming adults will take 10 on a dc: 12 (commoner 1 w/ 2 cross-class points in Craft), with each population center contributing, and 200 years of reinvestment at a 3% return compounded during each active season. Craft taxes are set @ 25%, while peasant farmers are hit for 50% overall.

Total Land Values After Subsistence: 36,800,000.00 GP
Total Craft Values: 239,805,000.00 GP
Yearly Revenue (Free State, no Lord Taxes): 276,605,000 GP

Total Yearly Budget for City State (Less Investment): 221,284,000 GP
Net Worth of Hard Assets owned by government: 1,094,717,742.08 GP
Total expendable wealth/year after maintenance: 199,389,645.16 GP.

Again this figures in the D&D economy of 'high magic'. As D&D wealth uses magic as an economic sink? It is going to make for some very high numbers.

You have an enormous amount of money available to create castles, protective measures, etc. The overall available assets per square mile on the island is 4054 GP, or 19,350 GP/sq mile of the city state. The overall available yearly budget per square mile comes to 3524GP.

What does that mean? Well, since you are very focused on not using magic, your nobles can live quite well. How well? They can afford to support a large amount of sea voyages, and affecting change around the world. I would suggest the hiring of mercenary companies for protecting the location and doing the dirty work rather than having to worry about killing off your own population. The Standard of Living for those in government is probably far above Extravagant (200 GP/mo), as their upkeep is a sweetener. The City State can loan money to various kingdoms, providing an additional revenue stream.

In theory this culture seems to well represent the Italian city-states and their sheer earnings in a D&D setting. With 3500 GP/sq mile for programs the government could easily create garrisons of mercenaries paid for by the State to keep the peace, and plenty of government employees. The life of a member of the State is fantastically rich; even a maid would be able to be paid an enormous sum in comparison to a normal worker.

Problems with the analysis include the fact that, well, the numbers for children are way off of the norm for a Medieval society. I would personally maintain these numbers and increase the population through children and elders who do not provide economic benefit. . . And I would probably go with the standard 'non-combatant' numbers (10-20%) for those who do not pay into the system.

Mercenaries bring their own followers, children, servants, etc. to the area. I would think that, while the stable population would be ~ 2 million, there are enormous seasonal fluctuations. The city state is a jewel in the hand of any raiders who could take it, it knows this, and thus protects itself with its overwhelming wealth and alliances.

Slainte,

-Loonook.

 

[haakon1]

I'd read up on modern city states.

-- Singapore

-- Straits Settlements (historical colony of Penang + Singapore)

-- Macau

-- Brunei

-- Hong Kong

-- Monaco

-- Holy See/Vatican City

-- UAE (a series of emirates, which are basically city states)

-- the Persian Gulf region more generally (Bahrain, Qatar, Kuwait, and UAE all have some resemblance to city states)

You'll notice:
-- Many were created as trading colonies (SG, HK, Macau)
-- Many are/were protectorates of a great power (HK and Macau are "Special Administrative Regions" of China, Monaco is essentially a protectorate of France, Vatican City is essentialyl a protectorate of Italy).
-- Resources sustain some (oil in Brunei and UAE)
-- Being an open port with free trade and people visiting from all lands is the lifeblood of others (Singapore, Hong Kong, Dubai in UAE)
-- One was former pirate haven that made a deal with an empire to stop raiding each other (UAE)
-- One is the last refuge of a dead state (Vatican City is the last resting place of the former Papal States)
-- Several are repositories for a culture that tried to destroy its own past (Macau, HK, and SG preserved Chinese religion when China itself tried to destroy it in the Cultural Revolution, now mainlanders go to them if they want to learn about old folkways and religion that were surpressed)
-- Several have acted as entrepots (portals and exchange centers) between diverse cultures -- HK was a Western/Chinese interaction point. SG is a hub for trade and management of multinationals across Asia, leverage its English language and connections to India, China, and Southeast Asia. Dubai is a hub for Western/Arab interaction and management of multinationals across MEA (Middle East & Africa region)
-- One was kicked out of a federation due to racial/political differences with the majority group in the federation (Singapore expelled from Malaysia)
-- One is a major hub for gambling (Macau)
-- One is famous for its movies dramatizing martial arts and organized crime (HK)
-- Several provided bases for a foreign power that wants to project power into the region (Bahrain hosts US naval facilities, Kuwait is a portal to Iraq, Singapore was a key British naval base when it was a colony)

There's got to be a lot of interesting stuff in the real, current day world to use.

 

[Philotomy Jurament]

I'm not sure about a dark age city-state. Populations in the dark ages were surprisingly small (at least in Europe), and the economic and military organization wasn't what I think of as "city-state."

For classical city-states (e.g. Classical Greek city-states), the research is difficult, but a city-state of around 30,000 may have been average. They could get much larger, though. For example, accepted estimates of the population of Athens are more like 300,000.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Some basic numbers for medieval level agriculture...

Each 100 agricultural workers produces about enough to feed 103 people. This is really the key number when it comes to population structure. Not all of those 100 people are peasant farmers, some are craftspeople (millers, smiths, potters, carpenters, etc). The upshot is though that at least 80% of your population ARE literal dirt farmers. The entirety of the rest of the society is that last less than 3%. Historically in Europe around 2% of the population belonged to the upper classes (and most of those were still living at a fairly basic level, your average knight probably has a reasonably nice basic manor house, but even medieval kings were obliged to cart their own furniture around from residence to residence and owned maybe a few changes of clothing). Wealth is more bounded by availability of labor to produce luxury goods than anything else, since artisans, traders, etc are all still coming out of that less than 3%. Of course the peasants could labor for the state/landlord as well, but they were unskilled and again anything they did was incredibly labor intensive given the total lack of anything but muscle power and (expensive!) animal power.

Population growth was slow. Average mortality was VERY high. Most people didn't make it past age 25 and most of that was child mortality. In these kinds of societies (look at the least developed areas today and it is still true) you easily had 50% of your population under age. Cities and towns were particularly stuck here as disease was so rampant in these areas that they actually had negative population growth (it was made up for by inflow from the countryside in better times).

5% urbanization would be considered high in these societies. So if you have a population of 2 million you might have a grand total of 5% or 100,000 actual urban dwellers. You'd have some agricultural people perhaps living in the cities (farming nearby) and some of the basic crafts might be concentrated there too, then you'd have the majority of your less than 3% others presumably.

This jibes pretty well with say medieval England, which had a population estimated in the 2 million range around the 12th Century. London, York, Bristol, those were about the only 'cities' and the largest was under 50k population. Towns were pretty much just market centers, the populations were still basically all farmers with a smattering of trades.

Exactly what a city state can control is hard to say. Athens controlled vast holdings scattered all around the Mediterranean and Black Sea coasts, plus various islands, some dependent cities and towns in Greece proper, and its own local region. Presumably the 300k population must have depended on easily 5+ million rural dwellers in these areas.

From what I can see from maps each Greek city state controlled a region directly around it that might be at most 30-50 miles. IMHO if this island is fairly insular then the city states are going to have something like 100k people divided between them. Now, consider a 30x30 mile city state, it has 900 sq miles of territory, and if 25% of that is arable (it could vary from 10-50% though the higher numbers would represent a very rich area) then you've got 225 sq miles of farmland. 1 sq mile is 640 acres = 144,000 acres. Another 25% might be used for pasture and other 'agricultural uses'. Note that a cultivated acre will feed just about one person at a basic level for a year (500 liters of barley accounting for some going to the lord etc). Clearly a 30x30 mile area city state would have a population that might vary from 150k to possibly 300k in a really rich area of dense population, of which maybe 15-20k people would be living in the actual city.

Larger cities like Athens or the famous medieval Italian city states clearly must have controlled larger areas in some way. Athens had lots of colonies and imported vast amounts of grain from the Black Sea region.

So.... with a total 2 million population, you could have 7 city states, each controlling around 30 miles in all directions, having populations in the low 10's of thousands. That would be my guess as to about what you'd get.

As for the actual economics in terms of money, well, that's kind of whatever you want it to be. If you assume a day's worth of food is worth a couple silver pieces at most you get close to the kind of numbers in most D&D books for equipment and such. A peasant will produce maybe something like 100gp in a year, but he'll also eat about 97gp worth of that. The rest of his labor might be worth another 50gp or something, so perhaps in theory a state might have 100k people and 5 million gp in 'taxes', but 95% of that would be in the form of labor obligations, military service, etc. and mostly rendered to local land holders. The actual budgets of city states in terms of discretionary spending would be much lower, but it is hard to say exactly by how much. I'd just observe that the largest building projects in medieval times were things like castles, which often required several years to build (up to 10 for really big ones) and might require 100's or even upwards of 1000 workers.

 

[Balesir]

For the "economics" bit, there is an interesting breakdown here (look in the tables at the end) that seems to be not far off for places as far apart as England and Wales (the actual area studied) and Byzantium (cf. Cambridge Economic History of europe, Vol.1):

Roughly 50% of the output of the land goes to the labourers in the medieval period. If an agricultural labourer receives 2 sp per day, then their output is 4 sp per day. The exact method for the split varies enormously. In feudal lands, a serf works the lord's fields as "rent" for the land they hold and work for themselves; in Byzantine lands the peasants often hold land for crop share to a landlord; in Roman lands a landowner hires labourers or owns slaves to work the land and pays them in upkeep and/or wages.

Roughly 10% of the output (4 cp per day) is spent keeping up the capital used to produce the output - buildings, fences, hedges, carts, draft animals, new domestic animal stock, tools and equipment like ploughs, etc.

Roughly 10% of the output (4 cp per day) goes to the church as a religious offering. Note that the church is also, in medieval Europe, a big landowner, so their total share will be higher in this case.

Roughly 7-10% of the output (3-4 cp per day) goes to the "state". This might include direct taxation by a governing body, but also might include part of the share taken by the lord/landowner that has to be, in turn, given to the state by them (e.g. the scutage and other payments rendered by feudal lords).

The rest - around 20-23%, or 8-9 cp per day - goes to the landowner. Landowners in this era frequently owe a range of services to the "state", so the line is very blurred, here. Much of this also goes to pay the producers of craft goods in the towns for their produce.

As a final note, analysis of monastic records suggest that a "discount rate of interest" effectively used by medieval investors was around 10-12%. What this means, as a rule of thumb, is that if an investment is expected to yield X amount per year indefinitely, then the medieval investor would consider it a good investment if the required investment was around 8-10 times X.

Hope that helps!

P.S./Edit: I would also note that a "city state" typically had a geographical "reach" of 20-30 miles mainly because that was ~1 day's travel. The city was, as well as it's governmental and military functions, a market for its hinterland (which is to say, the "city state" is city plus hinterland). Many laws and customs relate to trade and property - ergo the unit of "government" is the "market" - you find this even in non-city state areas, such as feudal France and England. This also means that a city state's shape may be determined by transport links - primarily rivers, in medieval milieux (the state will extend further up and down the river than out to either side of it, unless another city state's lands clash - in which case, it's a likely area of conflict).

 

[Gold Roger]

I'm suprised noone has mentioned the Italian city states - Florence Milan Venice

These cities tended to be on difficult terrain and thus avoided conquest, there was also significant urban drift anf a huge population explosion so that the cities had over 100,000 inhabitants by the 13th century. The cities were trade centers supporting the surrounding rural zone but also saw largescale urbanisation (up to 20%)

I'd especially look at 11th and 12th cenury italy (which your suggestion looks closer to me than dark ages). That's when medieval city structures really emerged and begann influencing the powers that be.

Also, don't forget the malaria. Lots and lots of malaria in italy back then, which was quite a problem for the "roman"(german) emperors who considered northern italy theirs to rule.

I'm not sure about a dark age city-state. Populations in the dark ages were surprisingly small (at least in Europe), and the economic and military organization wasn't what I think of as "city-state."

For classical city-states (e.g. Classical Greek city-states), the research is difficult, but a city-state of around 30,000 may have been average. They could get much larger, though. For example, accepted estimates of the population of Athens are more like 300,000.

While low population in Europes is propably right, that doesn't mean every area had low population density. In many places, roman society structures where still very much intact. Especially in a fantasy "dark age" I wouldn't put city states out of possibility.

Doesn't mean it's a bad idea to look at the greek polis, which is the one that springs to mind first for "fantasy city state" reference.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Agriculture seems like a useful link on medieval European type agriculture. Classical period technology was a bit less sophisticated. Even low level magic might impact all of this somewhat though. Being able to cure diseases or get an acre or two of your land enhanced by the local druid could be a pretty decent boon, though I doubt it would add a huge amount to overall capacity (but it might well lessen the harshness of the bad times).

Now, considering military forces... Again you're looking at that 3% of the population that aren't farmers. The gentry/nobility are your main professional warrior class, so you're looking at say 60,000 people total that aren't famers out of 2 million. You can raise levies of course, but even there probably 10% of the population is fit to serve. England never raised an army of larger than about 20,000 before modern times. Most wars were fought with small bands of a few 100 to a few 1000 men, plus sporadic levying. Chances are even the most powerful of your city states might raise a mighty army of 10k soldiers once every few centuries. The rest of the time they'd be fielding 1000 men here and a 1000 there. Maybe every decade or two there'd be a big fight. Again, this jibes well with classical Greek military force size estimates where Alexander might have had 30k men and a 10k army size would be pretty large. Sparta in the 300's BC was fielding forces of a few 1000 and even those would only be available for a few months out of the year. This is really one of the main reasons that it was hard to take over other cities, there just wasn't a large population base to draw the men from needed to siege and conquer an opponent's city state. Even if you DID manage to beat them the enemy tended to revolt etc before too long and you simply couldn't afford large garrisons needed to permanently control territory.

 

[Hand of Evil]

Agriculture seems like a useful link on medieval European type agriculture.

Then you have Maya, Inca, Aztec, etc that used Chinampa and produced a lot of food (normally use this for my Dwarf/Halflings races).

 

[trancejeremy]

Agriculture seems like a useful link on medieval European type agriculture. Classical period technology was a bit less sophisticated.

Wasn't the opposite true? Irrigation, for instance, was much better. They had water powered mills (saw that on TV just last night, actually), they had mechanical reaping devices. All of which was pretty much forgotten by the Dark Ages...

But then I'm mostly speaking about Roman stuff.

 

[DrunkonDuty]

As for one city state contolling another city state, it certainly happened. The late Medieval/early Renaisance Italian city states did indeed conquer smaller ones. But AFAIK it really was only the few big ones (Milan, Venice, Florence etc) that could hope to do something like this. But even without out-right conquest there's plenty of ways to get involved in the politics of another city-state.

Here's some possible game scenarios:

Cities X, Y and Z are all alike in dignity and power. City X helps a prominent family in rival City Y to become the leading family in the republican government of City Y. City Y now begins to favour City X. The previous First Family appeal to City Z for help, starting a clandestine war. There's plenty of room for spies and assassins on both sides. Plus there's the possiblility that some other party might try to make use of the turmoil to forward their own ends.

City X conquers the much smaller Town A. In order to pay for the garrison they need to maintain as well as make a profit they greatly increase taxes on Town Y. Shortly thereafter Robin Hood style bandits help the oppressed peasantry by stealing from the rich and all that.

City X and City Z are engaged in a trade war: both seek to monopolise the trade from the continent. Their ships always fight when they meet at sea and bands of condotierri pillage the trade routes as sanctioned bandits. Less powerful families are the ones who are paying most of the cost of this war of bandits. Merchant House B, based in City X, fed up with this state of affairs decide to replace the current government with a less warlike one of their own choosing. But at the same time they know that for their scheme to work City Z would need a more peaceful government as well. So they hire some agents to contact a likely merchant house in City Z with the intent of forming an alliance with them and aiding one another in overthrowing their respective Republics. Secret messages, assassinations, counter-assassinations, spies, betrayals... All the good stuff.

I like me some political skullduggery.
Cheers.