M'Chek and Food: Contradicatory with the War?
Posted: Fri Aug 27, 2004 7:12 pm
Alright, since it seems we continually get conflicting views and opinions on the subject, perhaps there can be some level of clarification.
It's been eluded to that M'Chek is supposedly in some sort of constant state of famine, with no food imports etc...
Yet this is a flat contradiction of the first few posts on the subject by Orleron, who suggests A. Mikona itself isn't particularly starving as its a center of commerce, and B. The nobles tend to foot a large bill by buying vast amounts of food from abroad and distributing them to their local constiuencies.
The problem then that the statement seemed to imply was that A. There was MASSIVE amounts of overcrowding particularly near Mikona(think Mexico City?) due to the nature of the city as a port/commerce district and B. That the outskirts therefore starved because food imported tended not to get distributed beyond the keeps/cities.
This seems to go completely in the face of the current(and to be honest long-standing) characterization that M'Chek is constantly on the verge of starvation with vast numbers of villagers dying in the streets because they lack food.
The latter view of mass starvation also flies in the face of having a war in the state it's in now, that is a constant all-out piece of warfare lasting well into the half-century mark. How the heck does a country that can't even feed its commoners maintain an active(and more importantly) combat fit army for well over fifty years and CONTINUE to try to invade a neighboring nation?
Feeding an army is messy, exhausting work, even with local foraging and pillaging (as practiced by Bonaparte) the logistics of which weren't even perfected into the advent of modern warfare well into the 19th century. How the heck does M'Chek, a starving supposedly impovrished overcrowded nation who has farmers constantly starving in the street manage to upkeep an army large enough, mobile enough and fit enough to continue trying to invade T'Nanshi? The foraging/pillaging alone that an army of that size would require along the border would surpass the ability of the populace there to maintain, nevermind the negative effects to the population growth you'd have if you started sending young men in droves into battle.
How is this supposed to be reconciled PARTICULARLY combined with the sheer length of non-stop warfare.
The hundred years war in Europe went on for a hundred years, sure, but in terms of actual warfare it was staggered into something like four periods with less than four or five months of actual warfare each. Why? Because a war of that scale would not only bankrupt a nation, but the army would whither on its vine because it couldn't provide for itself.
So, what exactly is the story here?
Are the famines actually exaggerated and in fact not nearly as bad as portrayed, or has M'Chek essentially been depopulating itself through fighting a war it can't afford to fight to feed itself?
It's been eluded to that M'Chek is supposedly in some sort of constant state of famine, with no food imports etc...
Yet this is a flat contradiction of the first few posts on the subject by Orleron, who suggests A. Mikona itself isn't particularly starving as its a center of commerce, and B. The nobles tend to foot a large bill by buying vast amounts of food from abroad and distributing them to their local constiuencies.
The problem then that the statement seemed to imply was that A. There was MASSIVE amounts of overcrowding particularly near Mikona(think Mexico City?) due to the nature of the city as a port/commerce district and B. That the outskirts therefore starved because food imported tended not to get distributed beyond the keeps/cities.
This seems to go completely in the face of the current(and to be honest long-standing) characterization that M'Chek is constantly on the verge of starvation with vast numbers of villagers dying in the streets because they lack food.
The latter view of mass starvation also flies in the face of having a war in the state it's in now, that is a constant all-out piece of warfare lasting well into the half-century mark. How the heck does a country that can't even feed its commoners maintain an active(and more importantly) combat fit army for well over fifty years and CONTINUE to try to invade a neighboring nation?
Feeding an army is messy, exhausting work, even with local foraging and pillaging (as practiced by Bonaparte) the logistics of which weren't even perfected into the advent of modern warfare well into the 19th century. How the heck does M'Chek, a starving supposedly impovrished overcrowded nation who has farmers constantly starving in the street manage to upkeep an army large enough, mobile enough and fit enough to continue trying to invade T'Nanshi? The foraging/pillaging alone that an army of that size would require along the border would surpass the ability of the populace there to maintain, nevermind the negative effects to the population growth you'd have if you started sending young men in droves into battle.
How is this supposed to be reconciled PARTICULARLY combined with the sheer length of non-stop warfare.
The hundred years war in Europe went on for a hundred years, sure, but in terms of actual warfare it was staggered into something like four periods with less than four or five months of actual warfare each. Why? Because a war of that scale would not only bankrupt a nation, but the army would whither on its vine because it couldn't provide for itself.
So, what exactly is the story here?
Are the famines actually exaggerated and in fact not nearly as bad as portrayed, or has M'Chek essentially been depopulating itself through fighting a war it can't afford to fight to feed itself?