10-24-2006, 03:59 PM
Quote: The problem is worst for armies inland, because grain can only be hauled from a radius of a few dozen miles before your pack animals and bearers are eating most of their load carrying it to the troops.
I don't think this is true. I myself have hiked a dozen miles with just a small bag of snacks. A mule with a cart, or a man with a cart, could haul enough food to keep himself going for hundreds of miles, without any foraging at all. I'm not sure what the distance is before you've eaten your food, but the milage has to be much greater than a just a few dozen. Pioneers in the early United states could journey for thousands of miles in a covered wagon with no roads at all and very little knowledge of what they were up against. Not all of them made it alive, but many did. The logistics problems of a large army are just the current paradigm of thought, based on pure theory. I haven't seen evidence to convince me.
Also, we keep hearing about non-combatants. I find it very hard to believe that you can have half your army doing nothing while marching, and the other half doing nothing while the battle is raging. That cuts your logistical supply in half right there for no good reason. If you can hold a spear, you're a fighter. I have never read in any ancient source, about what happened to the supposed thousands of non-combatants in the enemy camp when a battle was won. "Um.. Hi. We're non-combatants, and um.. we'll just be going home now since we lost and all. Congrats on the victory." I have read many times in those sources of the need to keep soldiers busy to prevent various kinds of trouble from them. I think the average soldier could handle driving a mule cart. It sure beats marching!
Rich Marinaccio
