View source for Talk:Army

"sargent" or "sergeant" ?

:Sergeant. As far as I can tell it's not a question of US vs. UK spelling. Organi'''z'''ation on the other hand is, so I have left it. [[User:Conrad Leviston|Conrad Leviston]] 08:13, 19 Oct 2005 (CDT)
----
Okay, what I would like added to this page is trivial information like:
* Who had standing [[army|armies]]? e.g. [[barony|baronies]]? [[kingdom]]s? [[city-state]]s?
** Probably anyone who thought they needed them, and could '''afford'''.  having a standing army meant either taking your own population off jobs like sowing and harvesting crops (thus risking starvation), or inviting in someone else's spare warriors, who needed feeding, and might decide to overthrow you if they thought they weren't paid enough. --[[User:Simoncursitor|Simoncursitor]] 03:10, 20 Oct 2005 (CDT)
*** For the most part there were very few standing armies until late in [Period] in Europe after the fall of the Roman Empire. The Feudal system was supposed to provide a Lord, Noble, King or whomever with a military force. The most common requirement was that each Lord would provide a set number of Knights for a 40 day period of service. Each Knight also brought along his squires and men-at-arms depending on how many he could afford to retain. After the first 40 days the Knights were paid a set amount per day. The Noble calling up the army was supposed to provide any and all supplies but most food and other supplies were provided by the time honored methods of Foraging and/or Looting the countryside where the army was operating. Toward the late [[Period]] it became common for a Lord to pay a fee instead of providing Knights. This was supposed to allow the King or other Noble with the money to pay the other Knights for thier extended service or allow for the hiring of Mercenaries. This eventually led to the formation of standing National Armies since professional soldiers were able to train year around and were seen as being more loyal to the head of state. -- --[[User:Greylond|Greylond]] 11:42 23 Nov 2005
* What jobs formed a [[period]] army? e.g. [[archer]]s, [[engineer]]s, washerwomen, [[bodyguard]]s, [[falconer]]s?
** Depends on period -- early: footsoldiers with spears, axes, some swords plus mounted leaders; middle mounted and foot knights (armoured); mounted scouts and foot infantry (part-armoured); archers and specialists (could be armoured); and expendable peasant militia at the front, unarmoured but killing them off cut down the mouths to feed.  Later knights, hackbutters, Swiss mercenaries etc. --[[User:Simoncursitor|Simoncursitor]] 03:10, 20 Oct 2005 (CDT) (IMHO)
* What resources were carried with an army? e.g. [[tent]]s, [[throne]]s, [[pigeon]] coops?
* Were armies generally for offense or defense?
I don't know any of this details but I believe people like [[Anton de Stoc|Anton]] do. - [[User:Cian|Cian Gillebhrath]] 18:52, 19 Oct 2005 (CDT)

== Definition of army ==

I am not sure that the definition of army used here is strictly speaking correct. My understanding is that an army refers specifically to a paid group of warriors. Groups of warriors who are gathered by other means, such as the fulfillment of fealty, are referred to as a host. [[User:Conrad Leviston|Conrad Leviston]] 23:18, 30 October 2006 (EST)