Population & People

[Variol Farseer]

VF, your reasoning certainly makes sense, but as I pointed out in the original post, consider perhaps that the 21,000 strong WarWard was not a standing army in the truest sense of the word.

The Lords were preparing for a confrontation with Foul, in terms of his original prophecy, and thus they were very much on a "war-footing", and therefore it may be that the WarWard at that time was more than the Land could support indefinitely as an army.

At any time when we hear of the Warward, the entire body of troops was gathered in one place. This is true even in LFB, when no war had been fought within living memory and none was expected. The warriors show no sign of having had civilian jobs or professions in addition to soldiering. That's a standing army by any meaningful definition of the term.

Remember, the Lords had been preparing for that confrontation with Foul for forty years. Forty years is 'indefinitely' when it comes to supporting an army.

What would that population extrapolation look like if you applied the same theory to the WarWard in LFB, adjusting for population growth over the intervening years?

Actually, given how few children the people of the Land seem to have had, I wouldn't be surprised to find that there was no population growth at all between LFB and TIW. If there was, it wasn't enough to seriously affect the maximum size of the Warward.

[Landwaster]

Dude... Landwaster just suddenly reappears two years later...

Yeah I fell over, hit my head on a coffee table ...

[Avatar]

Good post VF, especially about the timeframe. But, (and I'm not sure if we have the numbers), I'm positive the WarWard was smaller at the time of LFB. Afterall, doesn't Mhoram (or somebody) say that it is now at it's largest ever?

If there was no population growth, (and certainly, I would imagine that any such growth would be very small), then the increased WarWard would have come from the same population that was supporting the smaller one.

So where did the extra's come from to have increased the WarWard to 21,000, if not from the general population?

(I don't have my copy of LFB at the moment, lent it out, so if anybody could check to see if they give a number for the WarWard...) Essentially, I reiterate, I'm arguing for a smaller population of the Land than you posit yourself, (small as your estimate is). I think I'd even be comfortable with 500,000, (which would, by your reckoning, (if my math is right) suggest a WarWard of 12,500, pre-TIW.)

--A

[KAY1]

I don't have my copy of LFB to hand but I'm sure Mhoram said they were at their weakest at the time and 'the Warward is less than 2 thousand'. So very titchy. I know in TIW Troy does give clearer figures at the current time.

[Avatar]

Hmm, for some reason, I seem to remember that the WarWard in LFB was about 10,000 strong, but I could easily be wrong there, as I said, my book is lent out.

The numbers in TIW are very specific though in most cases, if you're interested, there's always the "Defend the Land" thread.

--A

[Variol Farseer]

Good post VF, especially about the timeframe. But, (and I'm not sure if we have the numbers), I'm positive the WarWard was smaller at the time of LFB. Afterall, doesn't Mhoram (or somebody) say that it is now at it's largest ever?

If there was no population growth, (and certainly, I would imagine that any such growth would be very small), then the increased WarWard would have come from the same population that was supporting the smaller one.

So where did the extra's come from to have increased the WarWard to 21,000, if not from the general population?

(I don't have my copy of LFB at the moment, lent it out, so if anybody could check to see if they give a number for the WarWard...) Essentially, I reiterate, I'm arguing for a smaller population of the Land than you posit yourself, (small as your estimate is). I think I'd even be comfortable with 500,000, (which would, by your reckoning, (if my math is right) suggest a WarWard of 12,500, pre-TIW.)

--A

I thinkperhaps you misunderstand me slightly. My numbers are based on the maximum number of troops that a given population could support (without sending them home every year to grow crops to feed themselves). There is, of course, no reason why the number of troops at any given time should equal that maximum. The Warward could have been abolished altogether, and it wouldn't have made any difference to the population figures. (In the short run, I mean. In the long run, if the Land were totally disarmed, someone would have wiped the population out — if not Lord Foul, then some lunatic adventurer like Drool Rockworm.)

[Digital Thought]

The key question is what kind of population it would take to support a Warward of 21,000 (the number Hile Troy had at the beginning of TIW),

As I recall, in TIW, it is explained to Covenant that although they had no white magic they did not stand still. And in this explanation I believe it is stated that where before Foul people joined up with stonedowner lore or woodelvin lore that they now almost all joined the warward. Almost all.

This would leave those in their 40's & certainly 50's plus, exempt from soldering but needed for feeding an army. It would leave those younger than 14 to run errands, messaging, etc.

There would be those that stayed with their towns & villages. There would be those that stayed with Revelstone and other iconic locations. That's about it. THe rest is mostly empty of human life at all. I'm guessing 70,000-100,000. Tops.

They threw EVERYTHING they had at Foul because they knew they had to do so to even have a chance. Everyone able to hold a spear & shield & armor was out on the field of battle. It would be as if almost all the young, strong men of the entire nation went to war. And that's the way I understand it to be from the books.

[Marv]

does anyone think that simple mundane tasks like growing crops would require far less man power in The Land because of the lores they can learn because of health sense and other such advantages? maybe there is something in the books about it.i am too lazy.sorry.