I think most demographic reconstructions of the Roman would assume a life expectency/E0 of 20 to 30 years. If in doubt, let's assume something close to 25 years and close to Coale and Demeney (and Vaughan)'s "Model West" reconstruction.
For slaves, would 22.5 years be more reasonable?
Spartacus's uprising has traditionally been interpreted as an attempted mass escape. If true, I think the demographics would resemble a refugee group rather than an army. Is this reasonable?
Could refugees accompanying Union armies in the American Civil War be a modern analogue? Is there data on their demography? But how could I adjust for the general increase in life expectancy by the 19th century?
Given expected pregnancies, and long-term disabilities, how many would be able to fight?
I've seen an estimate of 17% for Hellenic poleis conscripting men. (Mogens Herman Hansen, "How to Convert an Army Figure into a Population Figure," in Greek Roman and Byzantine Studies, 2011. 8% if only counting hoplites.) But that's without women.
Thanks!
I've seen an estimate of 17% for Hellenic poleis conscripting men. (Mogens Hermann Hansen, "How to Convert an Army Figure into a Population Figure," in Greek Roman and Byzantine Studies, 2011. 8% if only counting hoplites.)
So I can't access GRBS, but I'm terribly interested at how they arrived at these numbers. My understanding is the Revolutionary army of France ~1790 was just 5% of the population, and that is considered by some Roman historians as total mobilization. These numbers are extraordinary. Can you show us what you're looking at?
To clarify. I'm interested in finding out what proportion of the refugee or slave-rebel groups could defend their camps, or fight Roman armies directly approaching their camps.
So the best analogue is how many could defend a city or town, not how many would be sent to a field army in the Roman Italia in 225 B.C.E. or Revolutionary France in 1790.
The 5% rate for Revolutionary France, 7.7% rate for 7.7% for Sweden in 1709, or 21% rate for Germany in 1918 are measuring something else-- with higher life expectancies, but involving longer separations from home, and considerable logistical problems providing enough food and later ammunition to these field armies.
The estimated proportion who were subject to conscription, ranging from 17% to 30% in different sources, seems more nearly relevant.