The fact that wars could go on for 100 years (1337-1457), or 80 years
(1568-1648), or in repeated succession so that wars seemed perpetual must
certainly seem strange to us because for 200 years war has been concentrated
into very brief periods (well since 1815, anyway).

Pieter observes:
"In RL though, forreign wars can have a huge influence on morale and
loyalty. A few killed soldiers can mean the difference between the
pressence of American soldiers or not. This effect can be so big, that
certain rulers concider it a victory if they shoot down just 1 plane."

This is the product of modern communications whereby every loss is immediat
to every television viewer. Also, we are not hardened to pain and
suffering, living lives of retative comfort and ease. Death was simply much
closer during the Renaissance than it is now.

Before the age of industrialization, (the BR era included) there was a
proffessional class of warriors who did all the fighting (today the
proffessionals lead volunteers, who really just wanted the educational
assistance, or conscripts). Consider this testament by a late 18th century
member of the lower nobility:
"Woe is me! Would that I had been struck down by some bullet, for my only
wish is to die on the field of honor! My father, my grandfather, and my
great grandfather were all killed on campaign, but I am left to carry my
silvery head back over my threshold." (Schertel von Buertenbach, 1779)

The only things that war did to effect loyalty was irritate the masses by
its extractions, mostly high taxes. Otherwise the thigs that effected
loyalty were mostly the weather. Bad harvests could cause uprisings.

Kenneth Gauck