Kingdom devastated by war - how long to rebuild army?

S'mon said:
I don'y believe that modern weapons are easier to use and maintain than basic spear & shield training. Swords are a different kettle of fish, but spears are a pretty simple weapon.
Agreed. Someone is overestimating the time it takes to learn to use simple melee weapons. Eegh! 6 months!? No chance it takes that long to earn "proficiency."

EDIT: This is especially noteworthy considering that modern basic training does include extensive melee combat training, including bayonet (turn that rifle into a spear!), knife, and unarmed combat. Those six weeks aren't just a summer camp for target shooting enthusiasts...
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

S'mon said:
From your description it sounds like there are enough survivors (several hundred) & retired veterans (unstated, but could be in the thousands) that there wouldn't be much trouble finding leaders for a new army of 5,000 or even 10,000. The kingdom may wish to hire mercenaries to help train the new recruits but it doesn't sound strictly necessary.

From everything you've said, if this is a typical feudal kingdom that was able to field an army of 5,000 + 45,000 levied militia, IMO there are no manpower reasons it would be able to field another force of 50,000 within a year. There might be financial or logistic reasons it could not afford to do so, and GDP might decline if there were a labour shortage, but probably by no more than 5-10%. If this is a wealthy kingdom the smart thing to do would be to recruit a trained professional army larger than the last one, and let the farmers keep farming, they could field an army of ca 20,000 without a noticeable effect on GDP - in fact the increased economic activity of the soldiers spending their pay may fuel the economy.

I think I'm leaning that way now - the kingdom will probably recruit large mercenary bands that have good reputations for the first year, but that still will not stop rebellions, intrigue among the old & new nobility, etc. They'll take the hit economically the first year for hiring the mercenaries & bringing in more strapping lads from the fields. Additionally, they will try to field regiments or companies of women (possibly crossbowmen and/or light cavalry). But, they will require training and getting officers & new knights up to speed as well.

The 45,000 levied militia were ones with rudimentary military training that most likely are full time farmers, shepherds, butchers, bakers & candle stick makers who - in return for a small stipend each year - are required to answer their king's call when he needs them - which was normally a fairly rare occurrence... but, this was an invasion on an epic scale.
 

US troops are training the new Iraqi armed forces of soldiers, elite troops and the police force. Check out some of the numbers presented in the news articles (I saw them in nytimes.com) and adjust them to fit your nation. Although the numbers in those articles will be for modern troops, the numbers shouldn't differ that much (maybe 10-20%)

Com
 

Slife said:
It's closer to doubling every thirty years. Compound interest, ya'know?


Not really even that. Most modern nations need a population growth of 2-3% or more just to remain at the same level of population.
 

Captain Tagon said:
Not really even that. Most modern nations need a population growth of 2-3% or more just to remain at the same level of population.

:confused: :eek: :lol: :lol: :lol:

"Population growth" means your population is, by definition, increasing . Are you talking about birth rate?
 

The_Universe said:
Agreed. Someone is overestimating the time it takes to learn to use simple melee weapons. Eegh! 6 months!? No chance it takes that long to earn "proficiency."

EDIT: This is especially noteworthy considering that modern basic training does include extensive melee combat training, including bayonet (turn that rifle into a spear!), knife, and unarmed combat. Those six weeks aren't just a summer camp for target shooting enthusiasts...

Hey, I said 3-6 six months. And even spear and shield fighting is more complicated than using a bayonetted rifle as a spear. (Contrary to popular belief, using a shield properly does not just consist of holding it in front of yourself!) There is also formation work to consider. And hand-to-hand fighting. (Again, contrary to popular belief, midevil soldiers were well trained in such 'arts'.) So 3-6 months to train up raw recuits to fully accepable standards is not all that unlikely. (Note that that's full training, not just "this ia a spear, you stab with it' training.) At this point I must strongly recommend Elizabeth Moon's 'Sheepfarmer's Daughter'. In it she shows the training of a (female) recuit in a mercenary company. (And please note that she was a marine, and looked into the subject in considerable detail.)
 

S'mon said:
:confused: :eek: :lol: :lol: :lol:

"Population growth" means your population is, by definition, increasing . Are you talking about birth rate?


Possibly. All those economics classes run together, but I'm pretty sure the actual term population growth used with percentiles and such is a bit misleading. But who really knows?
 

I'm not as optimistic as S'mon over this, but I don't think his numbers are without merit.

A battle with that level of actual mortality, however, would be extraordinarilly devastating by medieval standards. A loss of that sort is going to not only be legendary it's going to cause some serious disruption in terms of people's confidence in the polity.

On that level:

-Mercenaries are going to be exactly what you want tactically in that they are going to be effecient and conservative if not terribly effective or a good means of projecting power.

-Mercenaries are going to be tremendously disruptive socially. On a minor level they are going to bring a lot of military power into urban areas where it was probably previosly in rural areas. On a major level if I'm a mercenary in that sort of situation I am not going to behave. This is exactly the sort of situation that results in new dynasties or coups.

-The nobility is going to replace itself from the outside among other places. This is even true internally as widowed ladies and bastards become more important social forces. But the real issue is a host of related families from outside the borders who are going to either claim inheritance or simply show up. On the plus side immigration is probably going to take of any low level labor shortages you have. Some villages may dissapear in the interim but the disruption to your tax, legal, and educational structures is a much bigger issue.

-Your society is going to become way more stratified. If you used to have a strong rural nobility I don't think they're going to come back in the same strength. Strong nobles who survive are going to become a lot stronger as they goble up undefended local holdings. Peasant rights and royal rights are going to go to :):):):) unless they make the right alliances or provide the right sort of incentives for negotiation. There may also be an increase in the middle class but if your society had a fairly flat structure before with prosperous lower classes and slightly less wealthy but broad upper classes that's going away.

-The overall military make up of your society is probably not going to come back. If the nation has similar neighbors they can import military tech and knowledge from they're going to recover their tech (in the soft sense) faster, but if you had anything unique or you've got problems with distributing imports then your next war is going to be fought differently. At the least a very different sort of people will be hiring. This isn't necessarilly bad, if you have any native or unique modes of warfare you haven't used much before now is the time to develop them.

One factor I'm unclear about:

Were the 5000 permanent troops the levied nobility or an extraordinarilly large royal guard?

Cause if I'm one of the remaining or incoming nobility and the central court lost an asset like that I'm seriously going to consider renegotiating my relationship with that court, and if I'm that court I'm going to have seriously consider the expediency of such an expensive asset as well when the levies need so much shoring up.

What's the local geopolitical situation like? How fast is that horde going to replace itself?
 

Dr. Strangemonkey said:
I'm not as optimistic as S'mon over this, but I don't think his numbers are without merit.

I studied a lot of ancient history at school, you often saw ancient-world societies' citizen armies being replaced with extraordinary speed, eg the Romans after Cannae or the Athenians after losses to the Spartans. However I do think the loss will be devastating. IMC the highly militarised kingdom of Thrinia pop 600,000 recently lost its entire army of 30,000 and Thrinian Knights order of 5,000 knights & retainers, including its king, wizards and leading nobles, the effect combined with invasion of the Mabden horde (responsible for this) has been to effectively knock a 15th century state back to the 6th century in political terms as society collapses in something akin to the situation in Britain after the Roman withdrawal & Saxon invasions. This was a case though where the battle was lost and very few trainers survived.
 


Remove ads

Top