TL;DR
This article analyzes how pre-industrial societies develop military systems that mirror their civilian hierarchies. It explains why armies are shaped by social, economic, and political factors, and why this matters for worldbuilding and historical understanding.
Pre-modern societies’ armies are shaped by their social, economic, and political structures, reflecting the civilian hierarchies and societal organization. This understanding is crucial for both historical analysis and accurate worldbuilding.
The series by Bret Devereaux examines how pre-industrial armies develop based on societal factors such as whether a society is agrarian, nomadic, or fragmented. He emphasizes that armies tend to mirror civilian hierarchies, with leadership, recruitment, and funding reflecting societal norms.
Devereaux highlights that most pre-modern armies are expensive to maintain and often rely on societal obligations, like conscription or militia systems, which are rooted in civilian social structures. He notes that these armies are not just military entities but extensions of their societies, often recreating social hierarchies on the battlefield.
Why It Matters
This analysis is significant because it helps creators and historians understand the underlying reasons for the composition and organization of armies in pre-modern societies. Recognizing these patterns aids in creating more realistic fictional worlds and provides insights into historical military campaigns.
medieval military reenactment armor
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Background
The discussion builds on previous work examining historical military systems and their relation to civilian societies, focusing on pre-industrial, agrarian, and nomadic societies. It contrasts these with industrial armies, which follow different models due to technological and organizational changes. The series aims to synthesize various historical examples and fictional portrayals to identify recurring patterns.
“No army can help but recreate its civilian social structures on the battlefield.”
— Bret Devereaux
“Armies tend to reflect the social hierarchies and organizational principles of their societies, whether agrarian, nomadic, or fragmented.”
— Bret Devereaux
historical army miniature figures
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
What Remains Unclear
It remains unclear how specific societies with mixed or transitional social structures might develop their armies, or how non-state or decentralized societies organize military force in the absence of a centralized state.
pre-modern warfare books
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
What’s Next
Future installments will explore how these social factors influence recruitment, funding, leadership, and battlefield cohesion in pre-modern armies, with case studies from historical and fictional societies.
medieval soldier costume
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Key Questions
How do societal structures influence military organization?
Societal structures determine who leads, how armies are recruited, funded, and maintained, often mirroring civilian hierarchies and social obligations.
Why are pre-modern armies expensive to maintain?
Because they rely on societal obligations, local resources, and often require large numbers of personnel, which impose significant costs on the society.
How does nomadic society organize its military forces?
Nomadic societies tend to have decentralized, mobile forces that are less hierarchical and more based on kinship or tribal alliances, differing from settled, state-based armies.
What are common patterns in pre-industrial armies?
Many follow patterns of social hierarchy, reliance on militia or conscription, and funding through societal obligations, with organization reflecting civilian life.
Source: Hacker News
