Suspension of disbelief?
> In trying to reconcile Heortling populations with map
> scale the limitation is maximum population per square mile given the
> farming methods used. For that we can use 19th Century populations
> of similar rural areas - even early 20th century ones for places like
> Eastern Europe and Russia. Granted 19th century farming methods were
> more efficent than medieval ones but the result of that was a labour
> surplus which moved to the cities not people sat around idle in the
> villages.
Similar farming methods? Or any farming methods?
If you could factor out a) the number of people actually involved directly in farming, and not just assumed to be, by this construction; b) the efficiency in terms of land use, and c) the efficiency in terms of workforce, then you might be able to draw some conclusions, but absent of such an analysis I'm not convinced.
> The use of magic would also improve productivity.
I must admit I'm irrationally and vehemently unenthused by this sort of rationale, in all its very many forms and occurrences. I think it's a pretty basic difference of approach -- is magic a manifestation of the truth of mythic themes, or is it Fantasy Tech Economy? OK, all our experience of Glorantha games probably tells us its "a little of column A, a little B", but at least I'm being up front about my foibles...
Besides, Greg has more than once said that in Genertela at least, magic is _necessary_ to survive, work the land, etc -- not hi-tech fertiliser to make the agribusiness that key 25% more productive. (Though I can't think of anything quite so bald-faced as this actually in print, so this is arguably open to "hyperbole with a dunkel in 'im" question.)
> The main reason for lower population figures in ancient and medieval
> times would be unused land - there weren't enough people to cultivate
> it.
Due to what, then -- lack of effort on the reproductive front?
Cheers,
Alex.
Powered by hypermail