Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="S'mon" data-source="post: 5588316" data-attributes="member: 463"><p>30 people/square mile is given as the average population density of medieval Britain.&nbsp; Ireland, which was boggy and flat, may have had a population density similar to the British average AIR, whereas south-east England would be higher and north-west Scotland lower.&nbsp; If the Cimmerian clan live in an area of windswept hills with poor productivity similar to the Scottish Highlands, they may need more territory - I tend to go with a density of around 10 per square mile, or something close to a 4-mile radius of the village for this group.&nbsp; Most of this will not be farmland though, around 1 square mile of barley &amp; wheat growing land per 50 people, say 6 square miles, would be about right if the land is fairly poor, depending on how rich the hunting is this could be lower (extreme case of Amerindian villages in coastal north-west America that lived enirely off the salmon runs &amp; hunting, no farming).&nbsp; If it's as rich as the fields of much of France or south-east England (eg Kent) then up to 200 people per square mile of farmland, I'd use that for central Aquilonia.</p></blockquote><p></p>

[QUOTE="S'mon, post: 5588316, member: 463"] 30 people/square mile is given as the average population density of medieval Britain. Ireland, which was boggy and flat, may have had a population density similar to the British average AIR, whereas south-east England would be higher and north-west Scotland lower. If the Cimmerian clan live in an area of windswept hills with poor productivity similar to the Scottish Highlands, they may need more territory - I tend to go with a density of around 10 per square mile, or something close to a 4-mile radius of the village for this group. Most of this will not be farmland though, around 1 square mile of barley & wheat growing land per 50 people, say 6 square miles, would be about right if the land is fairly poor, depending on how rich the hunting is this could be lower (extreme case of Amerindian villages in coastal north-west America that lived enirely off the salmon runs & hunting, no farming). If it's as rich as the fields of much of France or south-east England (eg Kent) then up to 200 people per square mile of farmland, I'd use that for central Aquilonia. [/QUOTE]

Verification