| # | Polity | Coded Value | Tags | Year(s) | Edit | Desc |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
People. Coded as a range to allow for flexibility around the value 10,000. Population collapse coded as 10% residual population of the previous levels coded.
Late Village Period (marked at c4200 BCE in periodization table) [1] "Now we see a dramatic shift. The number of sites drops quickly in the lowlands, first being apparent in Deh Luran and at a slower rate, but no less drastically, ultimately in Susiana. For practical purposes these regions both appear to have been essentially emptied of people by the end of this period. By now, the mordern climatic regime was established, giving, if anything, enhanced opportunity for the spread of villages into newly favorable areas. But what we see is not expansion, but a general contraction as it is expressed in the numbers of sites." [2] “By various estimates, the size of the settled population in the Late Village Period is between 8,500 and 25,000. (The figure of 200 persons per hectare of settlement is often used in these calculations [Dollfus 1983].)" [3] "The shifting nature of settlement in the Susiana Period is important for two reasons. First, it implies that estimates of population based on total numbers of sites on the plain are inherently suspect and probably too high, because sites are founded and abandoned through time and not all sites of a phase are occupied simultaneously. […] Even at peak density during the Susiana Period, there were probably fewer than ten inhabitants per square kilometre, an area that might support several times that many by agriculture (Adams and Nissen 1972: 29)" [4] "Since Susa stood alone, perforce it must have possessed sole responsibility for all of Susiana, a region in which 10,000 or more people may have resided in a multitude of separate communities." [5] Administrative control of Susa over 10,000 people? "The collapse of the Susa A polity or polities during the Terminal Susa A (Terminal Ubaid) period of the early fourth millennium B.C. on the Susiana Plain was discussed in the previous chapter. It is sufficient to say that this collapse involved a marked decrease in the population of the area." [6] [1]: (Hole 1987, 17) Hole, Frank ed. 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C. [2]: (Hole 1987, 85) Hole, Frank ed. 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C. [3]: (Hole 1987, 91) Hole, Frank ed. 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C. [4]: (Hole 1987, 92) [5]: (Hole 1987, 94) [6]: (Johnson 1987, 107) Johnson, Gregory A. in Hole, Frank ed. 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C. |
||||||
|
People. Adams proposed estimations for northern and southern enclaves. The southern enclaves had 20,110 inhabitants and the northern enclave had 38,540 people in Early-Middle Uruk Period. The northern enclave had 21,300 people and southern enclave had 41,020 people in the Late Uruk period
[1]
The available data concerns also the Susiana Plain. The population of whole Uruk polities is unknown. Early Uruk Period: 6,290-12,580 people; Middle Uruk: 8,860-17,520; Late Uruk Period: 4,560-9,120 people.
[2]
[1]: Adams 1981, 90 [2]: Wright 2001, 129-131 |
||||||
|
People. Coded as a range to allow for flexibility around the value 10,000. Population collapse coded as 10% residual population of the previous levels coded.
Late Village Period (marked at c4200 BCE in periodization table) [1] "Now we see a dramatic shift. The number of sites drops quickly in the lowlands, first being apparent in Deh Luran and at a slower rate, but no less drastically, ultimately in Susiana. For practical purposes these regions both appear to have been essentially emptied of people by the end of this period. By now, the mordern climatic regime was established, giving, if anything, enhanced opportunity for the spread of villages into newly favorable areas. But what we see is not expansion, but a general contraction as it is expressed in the numbers of sites." [2] “By various estimates, the size of the settled population in the Late Village Period is between 8,500 and 25,000. (The figure of 200 persons per hectare of settlement is often used in these calculations [Dollfus 1983].)" [3] "The shifting nature of settlement in the Susiana Period is important for two reasons. First, it implies that estimates of population based on total numbers of sites on the plain are inherently suspect and probably too high, because sites are founded and abandoned through time and not all sites of a phase are occupied simultaneously. […] Even at peak density during the Susiana Period, there were probably fewer than ten inhabitants per square kilometre, an area that might support several times that many by agriculture (Adams and Nissen 1972: 29)" [4] "Since Susa stood alone, perforce it must have possessed sole responsibility for all of Susiana, a region in which 10,000 or more people may have resided in a multitude of separate communities." [5] Administrative control of Susa over 10,000 people? "The collapse of the Susa A polity or polities during the Terminal Susa A (Terminal Ubaid) period of the early fourth millennium B.C. on the Susiana Plain was discussed in the previous chapter. It is sufficient to say that this collapse involved a marked decrease in the population of the area." [6] [1]: (Hole 1987, 17) Hole, Frank ed. 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C. [2]: (Hole 1987, 85) Hole, Frank ed. 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C. [3]: (Hole 1987, 91) Hole, Frank ed. 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C. [4]: (Hole 1987, 92) [5]: (Hole 1987, 94) [6]: (Johnson 1987, 107) Johnson, Gregory A. in Hole, Frank ed. 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C. |
||||||
|
People. "[O]n average an Early Predynastic chiefdom consisted of a population of over 13,000 with a ceremonial centre or town including outlying settlements, as well as many villages."
150 estimate from previous RA. 50-200: [3900-3800]-3500 BCE; 13,000: 3500-3400 BCE; 50,000: 3400-3200 BCE; 60,000: 3400-3000 BCE Naqada IA-B [1] Hoffman thought that in most of villages less than 75 people lived. In centers there were much more [2] 50-200 [3] Naqada IC-IIB [1] Hoffman thought that in most of villages less than 75 people lived. In centers there were much more [2] over 13,000 Naqadian Egypt is a quasi-polity, or rather a collection of quasi polities. During the majority of Naqada I there were single villages, which might have formed temporary alliances with other villages, but in fact were politically independent. Most of these villages consisted of 50 to 200 habitants. However it is possible that some of these alliances grew up to the bigger towns consisting of 1,000 or 2,000 people. It is during Naqada IC that these towns and villages started to unite and polities began to form. Now instead of scattered villages, there are a few chiefdoms with the town-centres, called sometimes pre-states and later, as the unification and polity development proceed, proto-states. So the rapid changes in the polity population coded above is not only an effect of growing population but also or even first of all the result of development of the chiefdoms size. The exact time and the spreed of unification is not known so scholars can only show the level of changes in some distinguishing point. And this is exactly what G. P. Gilbert did. [1]: G. p. Gilbert: 2004. Weapons, Warriors and Warfare in Early Egypt. Archaeopress: Oxford. pg: 108. [2]: Ciałowicz, M.A. 1999. Początki cywilizacji egipskiej. Warszawa-Kraków: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.pg:156. [3]: Wilkinson, T. 2003. Genesis of the Pharaohs: Dramatic New Discoveries Rewrite the Origins of Ancient Egypt. London:Thames & Hudson. pg: 120. |
||||||
|
People. Population estimate for Late Uruk period (c3200-3100 BCE) based on 4.6 persons per km2 estimate and estimated polity area of 1500 km of Renfrew’s (1975) Early State Module, which provides some support for 20km estimated communication distance in Middle Uruk from central place to administrative boundary.
[1]
Population of the Susiana [2] not sure why the figures are so specific, probably modelled data. using "administered population" for lowest figure of the range. Early Uruk: 19,036. The "administered population" was 9,806. Middle Uruk: 25,338. The "administered population" was 21,382. "Total (center and rural) population densities, in persons per square kilometer, for the Susiana between Terminal A ad Late Uruk are as follows:" [3] I’ve converted the terminology into dates using the table on page 17 of the book. 2.6 persons per km2 3800 BCE 8.4 3700-3600 BCE 11.2 3500-3300 BCE 4.6 3200-3100 BCE Early-Middle Uruk population increase occurred over about 300 years. [4] so transition would be c3500 BCE "A period of depopulation, characterized by political competition between Susa in the west and Chogha Mish in the east led to the rather enigmatic Late Uruk polity in which Chogha Mish was independent of Susa." [5] - note more recent reference possibly contradicts this "depopulation". [1]: (Johnson 1987, 115) Johnson, Gregory A. in Hole, Frank ed. 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C. [2]: (Johnson 1987, 131) Johnson, Gregory A. in Hole, Frank ed. 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C. [3]: (Johnson 1987, 122) Johnson, Gregory A. in Hole, Frank ed. 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C. [4]: (Johnson 1987, 120) Johnson, Gregory A. in Hole, Frank ed. 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C. [5]: (Sumner 1988) Sumner, William. 1988. Frank Hole, (ed.) - 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran, Settlement and Society From Prehistory to the Islamic Conquest. Paleorient. Volume 14. Number 1. pp.177-179. |
||||||
|
People. "[O]n average an Early Predynastic chiefdom consisted of a population of over 13,000 with a ceremonial centre or town including outlying settlements, as well as many villages."
150 estimate from previous RA. 50-200: [3900-3800]-3500 BCE; 13,000: 3500-3400 BCE; 50,000: 3400-3200 BCE; 60,000: 3400-3000 BCE Naqada IA-B [1] Hoffman thought that in most of villages less than 75 people lived. In centers there were much more [2] 50-200 [3] Naqada IC-IIB [1] Hoffman thought that in most of villages less than 75 people lived. In centers there were much more [2] over 13,000 Naqadian Egypt is a quasi-polity, or rather a collection of quasi polities. During the majority of Naqada I there were single villages, which might have formed temporary alliances with other villages, but in fact were politically independent. Most of these villages consisted of 50 to 200 habitants. However it is possible that some of these alliances grew up to the bigger towns consisting of 1,000 or 2,000 people. It is during Naqada IC that these towns and villages started to unite and polities began to form. Now instead of scattered villages, there are a few chiefdoms with the town-centres, called sometimes pre-states and later, as the unification and polity development proceed, proto-states. So the rapid changes in the polity population coded above is not only an effect of growing population but also or even first of all the result of development of the chiefdoms size. The exact time and the spreed of unification is not known so scholars can only show the level of changes in some distinguishing point. And this is exactly what G. P. Gilbert did. [1]: G. p. Gilbert: 2004. Weapons, Warriors and Warfare in Early Egypt. Archaeopress: Oxford. pg: 108. [2]: Ciałowicz, M.A. 1999. Początki cywilizacji egipskiej. Warszawa-Kraków: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.pg:156. [3]: Wilkinson, T. 2003. Genesis of the Pharaohs: Dramatic New Discoveries Rewrite the Origins of Ancient Egypt. London:Thames & Hudson. pg: 120. |
||||||
|
People.
EWA: standard ref is Michael Dee. Dee, Michael, David Wengrow, Andrew Shortland, Alice Stevenson, Fiona Brock, Linus Girdland Flink, and Christopher Ramsey 2013. An absolute chronology for early Egypt using radiocarbon dating and Bayesian statistical modelling. Proceedings of the Royal Society A 469 (2159, November, article no. 2013.0395), 1-10. This data need to be incorporated. 13,000: 3500-3400 BCE; 50,000: 3400-3200 BCE Naqada IIA-IIB: over 13,000; Naqada IIC-D: 50,000 [1] The ref here should be David Wengrow’s book. [1]: These are calculations made by G. p. Gilbert: 2004. Weapons, Warriors and Warfare in Early Egypt. Oxford; BAR International Series 1208. pg: 108. |
||||||
|
People. Population estimate for Late Uruk period (c3200-3100 BCE) based on 4.6 persons per km2 estimate and estimated polity area of 1500 km of Renfrew’s (1975) Early State Module, which provides some support for 20km estimated communication distance in Middle Uruk from central place to administrative boundary.
[1]
Population of the Susiana [2] not sure why the figures are so specific, probably modelled data. using "administered population" for lowest figure of the range. Early Uruk: 19,036. The "administered population" was 9,806. Middle Uruk: 25,338. The "administered population" was 21,382. "Total (center and rural) population densities, in persons per square kilometer, for the Susiana between Terminal A ad Late Uruk are as follows:" [3] I’ve converted the terminology into dates using the table on page 17 of the book. 2.6 persons per km2 3800 BCE 8.4 3700-3600 BCE 11.2 3500-3300 BCE 4.6 3200-3100 BCE Early-Middle Uruk population increase occurred over about 300 years. [4] so transition would be c3500 BCE "A period of depopulation, characterized by political competition between Susa in the west and Chogha Mish in the east led to the rather enigmatic Late Uruk polity in which Chogha Mish was independent of Susa." [5] - note more recent reference possibly contradicts this "depopulation". [1]: (Johnson 1987, 115) Johnson, Gregory A. in Hole, Frank ed. 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C. [2]: (Johnson 1987, 131) Johnson, Gregory A. in Hole, Frank ed. 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C. [3]: (Johnson 1987, 122) Johnson, Gregory A. in Hole, Frank ed. 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C. [4]: (Johnson 1987, 120) Johnson, Gregory A. in Hole, Frank ed. 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C. [5]: (Sumner 1988) Sumner, William. 1988. Frank Hole, (ed.) - 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran, Settlement and Society From Prehistory to the Islamic Conquest. Paleorient. Volume 14. Number 1. pp.177-179. |
||||||
|
People. Adams proposed estimations for northern and southern enclaves. The southern enclaves had 20,110 inhabitants and the northern enclave had 38,540 people in Early-Middle Uruk Period. The northern enclave had 21,300 people and southern enclave had 41,020 people in the Late Uruk period
[1]
The available data concerns also the Susiana Plain. The population of whole Uruk polities is unknown. Early Uruk Period: 6,290-12,580 people; Middle Uruk: 8,860-17,520; Late Uruk Period: 4,560-9,120 people.
[2]
[1]: Adams 1981, 90 [2]: Wright 2001, 129-131 |
||||||
|
People.
EWA: standard ref is Michael Dee. Dee, Michael, David Wengrow, Andrew Shortland, Alice Stevenson, Fiona Brock, Linus Girdland Flink, and Christopher Ramsey 2013. An absolute chronology for early Egypt using radiocarbon dating and Bayesian statistical modelling. Proceedings of the Royal Society A 469 (2159, November, article no. 2013.0395), 1-10. This data need to be incorporated. 13,000: 3500-3400 BCE; 50,000: 3400-3200 BCE Naqada IIA-IIB: over 13,000; Naqada IIC-D: 50,000 [1] The ref here should be David Wengrow’s book. [1]: These are calculations made by G. p. Gilbert: 2004. Weapons, Warriors and Warfare in Early Egypt. Oxford; BAR International Series 1208. pg: 108. |
||||||
|
People. Population estimate for Late Uruk period (c3200-3100 BCE) based on 4.6 persons per km2 estimate and estimated polity area of 1500 km of Renfrew’s (1975) Early State Module, which provides some support for 20km estimated communication distance in Middle Uruk from central place to administrative boundary.
[1]
Population of the Susiana [2] not sure why the figures are so specific, probably modelled data. using "administered population" for lowest figure of the range. Early Uruk: 19,036. The "administered population" was 9,806. Middle Uruk: 25,338. The "administered population" was 21,382. "Total (center and rural) population densities, in persons per square kilometer, for the Susiana between Terminal A ad Late Uruk are as follows:" [3] I’ve converted the terminology into dates using the table on page 17 of the book. 2.6 persons per km2 3800 BCE 8.4 3700-3600 BCE 11.2 3500-3300 BCE 4.6 3200-3100 BCE Early-Middle Uruk population increase occurred over about 300 years. [4] so transition would be c3500 BCE "A period of depopulation, characterized by political competition between Susa in the west and Chogha Mish in the east led to the rather enigmatic Late Uruk polity in which Chogha Mish was independent of Susa." [5] - note more recent reference possibly contradicts this "depopulation". [1]: (Johnson 1987, 115) Johnson, Gregory A. in Hole, Frank ed. 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C. [2]: (Johnson 1987, 131) Johnson, Gregory A. in Hole, Frank ed. 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C. [3]: (Johnson 1987, 122) Johnson, Gregory A. in Hole, Frank ed. 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C. [4]: (Johnson 1987, 120) Johnson, Gregory A. in Hole, Frank ed. 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C. [5]: (Sumner 1988) Sumner, William. 1988. Frank Hole, (ed.) - 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran, Settlement and Society From Prehistory to the Islamic Conquest. Paleorient. Volume 14. Number 1. pp.177-179. |
||||||
|
People. Population estimate for Late Uruk period (c3200-3100 BCE) based on 4.6 persons per km2 estimate and estimated polity area of 1500 km of Renfrew’s (1975) Early State Module, which provides some support for 20km estimated communication distance in Middle Uruk from central place to administrative boundary.
[1]
Population of the Susiana [2] not sure why the figures are so specific, probably modelled data. using "administered population" for lowest figure of the range. Early Uruk: 19,036. The "administered population" was 9,806. Middle Uruk: 25,338. The "administered population" was 21,382. "Total (center and rural) population densities, in persons per square kilometer, for the Susiana between Terminal A ad Late Uruk are as follows:" [3] I’ve converted the terminology into dates using the table on page 17 of the book. 2.6 persons per km2 3800 BCE 8.4 3700-3600 BCE 11.2 3500-3300 BCE 4.6 3200-3100 BCE Early-Middle Uruk population increase occurred over about 300 years. [4] so transition would be c3500 BCE "A period of depopulation, characterized by political competition between Susa in the west and Chogha Mish in the east led to the rather enigmatic Late Uruk polity in which Chogha Mish was independent of Susa." [5] - note more recent reference possibly contradicts this "depopulation". [1]: (Johnson 1987, 115) Johnson, Gregory A. in Hole, Frank ed. 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C. [2]: (Johnson 1987, 131) Johnson, Gregory A. in Hole, Frank ed. 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C. [3]: (Johnson 1987, 122) Johnson, Gregory A. in Hole, Frank ed. 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C. [4]: (Johnson 1987, 120) Johnson, Gregory A. in Hole, Frank ed. 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C. [5]: (Sumner 1988) Sumner, William. 1988. Frank Hole, (ed.) - 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran, Settlement and Society From Prehistory to the Islamic Conquest. Paleorient. Volume 14. Number 1. pp.177-179. |
||||||
|
People. Population estimate for Late Uruk period (c3200-3100 BCE) based on 4.6 persons per km2 estimate and estimated polity area of 1500 km of Renfrew’s (1975) Early State Module, which provides some support for 20km estimated communication distance in Middle Uruk from central place to administrative boundary.
[1]
Population of the Susiana [2] not sure why the figures are so specific, probably modelled data. using "administered population" for lowest figure of the range. Early Uruk: 19,036. The "administered population" was 9,806. Middle Uruk: 25,338. The "administered population" was 21,382. "Total (center and rural) population densities, in persons per square kilometer, for the Susiana between Terminal A ad Late Uruk are as follows:" [3] I’ve converted the terminology into dates using the table on page 17 of the book. 2.6 persons per km2 3800 BCE 8.4 3700-3600 BCE 11.2 3500-3300 BCE 4.6 3200-3100 BCE Early-Middle Uruk population increase occurred over about 300 years. [4] so transition would be c3500 BCE "A period of depopulation, characterized by political competition between Susa in the west and Chogha Mish in the east led to the rather enigmatic Late Uruk polity in which Chogha Mish was independent of Susa." [5] - note more recent reference possibly contradicts this "depopulation". [1]: (Johnson 1987, 115) Johnson, Gregory A. in Hole, Frank ed. 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C. [2]: (Johnson 1987, 131) Johnson, Gregory A. in Hole, Frank ed. 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C. [3]: (Johnson 1987, 122) Johnson, Gregory A. in Hole, Frank ed. 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C. [4]: (Johnson 1987, 120) Johnson, Gregory A. in Hole, Frank ed. 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C. [5]: (Sumner 1988) Sumner, William. 1988. Frank Hole, (ed.) - 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran, Settlement and Society From Prehistory to the Islamic Conquest. Paleorient. Volume 14. Number 1. pp.177-179. |
||||||
|
People, in a single polity. Estimate in the Middle Bronze Age taken from Finkelstein’s estimate of the Canaanite "territorial units" (i.e. polities),
[1]
[2]
with the upper boundary arbitrarily increased by 30% to account for methodological critiques of the estimating method. Finkelstein estimates his populations based on ground surveys of pottery remains and an assumed population density of 250 people per built-up hectare. However, the suitability of this assumption is not a given. "Some of the densities recently put forward for area coefficients have been based on unwalled, premodern villages…. How similar is such a village to a walled Bronze or Iron Age town or city? Although this is not a case of comparing apples and oranges (more like oranges and grapefruit), it seems probable that the economic constraints of building a defensive system put a permanent physical limit on the settlement area," leading to higher population densities.
[3]
"…the density coefficients employed by various population estimates of the Bronze Age, Iron Age, and Byzantine Period in the southern Levant using a figure of about 200-250 persons per hectare have been based upon data from observations in the old quarters of various Middle Eastern cities, towns, and villages in Iraq, Iran, and Syria (Finkelstein 1996; Broshi and Gophna 1986; Broshi 1979; Hassan 1981:66). Rather than assign an arbitrary density coefficient derived from a vastly different time period and culture, then simply applied to the overall measure of a settlement, more precise means should be used when seeking an accurate population estimate.… Basing a population estimate on the number houses, size of houses, members per household, and residential area of a site is essential for an accurate estimate because these figures can vary widely between sites, regions, and time periods."
[4]
The upper bound in the Late Bronze Age is taken from Kennedy’s estimate of Hazor (2013:328), increased by c. 20% to account for the built-up settlements within Hazor’s territory but outside of Hazor proper. [5] There are several other population estimates that are significantly smaller, but I judge them to be less convincing. "In northern Canaan, there was an apparent trend of urbanization in the region of southern Lebanon between the Middle Bronze Age and the Late Bronze Age—the larger sites stayed occupied while some of the smaller sites became unoccupied in Late Bronze I (Marfoe 1998: 170).4 This may indicate an urbanization of the region rather than depopulation, and could be reflective of Canaan as a whole. The rise of city-states, known definitively from the Amarna Letters, could account for this demographic trend of urbanization.5 Yet, broad conclusions about the Late Bronze Age from limited archaeological data and studies have been drawn that claim the Late Bronze Age was a period of demographic decline and even increased nomadism." [6] [1]: Finkelstein (1992:211) [2]: cf. Burke (2004:267). [3]: Zorn (1994:33) [4]: Kennedy (2013:12). [5]: Cf. Finkelstein (1992:211) [6]: Kennedy (2013:3). |
||||||
|
People, in a single polity. Estimate in the Middle Bronze Age taken from Finkelstein’s estimate of the Canaanite "territorial units" (i.e. polities),
[1]
[2]
with the upper boundary arbitrarily increased by 30% to account for methodological critiques of the estimating method. Finkelstein estimates his populations based on ground surveys of pottery remains and an assumed population density of 250 people per built-up hectare. However, the suitability of this assumption is not a given. "Some of the densities recently put forward for area coefficients have been based on unwalled, premodern villages…. How similar is such a village to a walled Bronze or Iron Age town or city? Although this is not a case of comparing apples and oranges (more like oranges and grapefruit), it seems probable that the economic constraints of building a defensive system put a permanent physical limit on the settlement area," leading to higher population densities.
[3]
"…the density coefficients employed by various population estimates of the Bronze Age, Iron Age, and Byzantine Period in the southern Levant using a figure of about 200-250 persons per hectare have been based upon data from observations in the old quarters of various Middle Eastern cities, towns, and villages in Iraq, Iran, and Syria (Finkelstein 1996; Broshi and Gophna 1986; Broshi 1979; Hassan 1981:66). Rather than assign an arbitrary density coefficient derived from a vastly different time period and culture, then simply applied to the overall measure of a settlement, more precise means should be used when seeking an accurate population estimate.… Basing a population estimate on the number houses, size of houses, members per household, and residential area of a site is essential for an accurate estimate because these figures can vary widely between sites, regions, and time periods."
[4]
The upper bound in the Late Bronze Age is taken from Kennedy’s estimate of Hazor (2013:328), increased by c. 20% to account for the built-up settlements within Hazor’s territory but outside of Hazor proper. [5] There are several other population estimates that are significantly smaller, but I judge them to be less convincing. "In northern Canaan, there was an apparent trend of urbanization in the region of southern Lebanon between the Middle Bronze Age and the Late Bronze Age—the larger sites stayed occupied while some of the smaller sites became unoccupied in Late Bronze I (Marfoe 1998: 170).4 This may indicate an urbanization of the region rather than depopulation, and could be reflective of Canaan as a whole. The rise of city-states, known definitively from the Amarna Letters, could account for this demographic trend of urbanization.5 Yet, broad conclusions about the Late Bronze Age from limited archaeological data and studies have been drawn that claim the Late Bronze Age was a period of demographic decline and even increased nomadism." [6] [1]: Finkelstein (1992:211) [2]: cf. Burke (2004:267). [3]: Zorn (1994:33) [4]: Kennedy (2013:12). [5]: Cf. Finkelstein (1992:211) [6]: Kennedy (2013:3). |
||||||
|
People.
According to McEvedy and Jones (1978) the total population of Siberia and Mongolia at this time did not exceed 400,000, while in Russian Turkestan in 1300 BC "we can think in terms of 100,000 people on the steppe." [1] The pre-Empire Xiongnu would have been a fraction of the total figure. 5-10% of 500,000 would provide an estimate of 25,000-50,000. This might represent an average of 20-40 groups covering this whole region. Since the time period 1400-300 BCE is extremely long I use this average for the 1400-500 BCE period and double it for the last 200 years prior to the rise of the Xiongnu Imperial Confederation. [1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 160-156) McEvedy, Colin. Jones, Richard. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books Ltd. London. |
||||||
|
People. Early = 500-1000 / Middle = 5,000-15,000 / Late = 20,000-25,000
"At the smallest and least complex (in terms of population, geographic scale and decision-making arrangements) end of this continuum, chiefs with limited decision-making prerogatives probably presided over single settlements. In larger examples, more powerful leaders based in larger centers likely exerted varying degrees of control over multiple and varying numbers of settlements. Finally, at the most complex end of this continuum, paramount chiefs ruling from large regional centers with lesser chiefs as political subordinates dominated even larger polities containing numerous settlements and substantial populations. In the present context it seems most likely that chiefdoms of the first type were prevalent during the earlier phases of the Iron Age, with those of the latter two types developing with increasing frequency as time passed." [1] Early in period = same as the population of a single settlement at that time 1. Single settlement e.g. 5 ha settlement [2] at 200 per ha gives upper limit of 1000. [500-1000]: 1200-1000 BCE Later in period = population of a large settlement, plus population of numerous lesser settlements that have substantial populations 1. Large regional center e.g. 50 ha settlement [2] at 200 per ha gives upper limit of 10,000. [5,000-10,000]: 599-300 BCE 2. Numerous settlements and substantial populationse.g. settlement of 20 ha [2] at 200 per ha gives an upper limit of 4,000. 5 ha settlement [2] at 200 per ha gives upper limit of 1000. Multiple these figures by 3 to approximate "numerous lesser settlements" = 15,000 [1]: R. Brubaker, Aspects of mortuary variability in the South Indian Iron Age, in Bulletin of the Deccan College Post-Graduate & Research Institute 60-61, pp. 253-302 [2]: P. Peregrine, M. Ember (eds), Encyclopedia of Prehistory, vol. 8: South And Southwest Asia (2003), p. 365 |
||||||
|
People.
100,000: 1122 BCE; 5,000,000: 1045; [9,000,000-12,000,000]: 957 BCE; 13,500,000: 771 BCE McEvedy and Jones (1979) say after the Shang Empire population actually increased quickly so that by 400 BCE the figure for a definition of China - that included parts outside the Western Zhou - was 25 million. Their implied figure for the Shang Empire in 1045 BCE was 5 million. [1] Maisels suggests 13.5 million for Western Zhou. [2] Relevant page in Maisel’s book not now accessible via google books so cannot check for date. If figure was at peak, i.e. c950 BCE, that would be a jump of 8m in 100 years from 5m in 1045 BCE. Seems high even for territorial acquisitions. Perhaps 13.5 million reflects 771 BCE. Have instead coded a range for the population at the the peak date between the beginning and end figures. [1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1979, 172) [2]: (Maisels 2001, 260) |
||||||
|
People.
"The central hill country—between the Jezreel and the Beer-sheba Valleys—is well known archaeologically from both excavations and intensive survey projects. The surveys, mainly those conducted in the 1980s, revealed a massive wave of settlement that swept throughout this region in the Iron I (Finkelstein 1988; 1995; Zertal 1994; Ofer 1994). The main concentration of sites can be found in the northern part of this region, between Jerusalem and the Jezreel Valley. The settlement process may have started in the final phase of the Late Bronze Age (the late thirteenth or early twelfth centuries b.c.e.), accelerated in the early Iron I (the late twelfth to mid-eleventh century), and reached its peak in the late Iron I (the late eleventh and first half of the tenth centuries b.c.e.). In the late Iron I there were approximately 250 sites in this area (compared to ca. 30 sites in the Late Bronze Age), with a total built-up area that can be estimated at roughly 220 hectares (ca. 50 hectares in the Late Bronze Age). Using the broadly accepted, average density coefficient of two hundred people living on one built-up hectare in premodern societies, the late Iron I population can be estimated at circa 45,000 people." [1] "Estimation of population is based on the results of surface surveys; if done properly, the collection of pottery sherds at a given site can shed light on the size of the site in every period of habitation. Accordingly, one can draw a settlement map for a given period with all sites, classified according to size, and compute the total built-up area. Deploying a density coefficient (number of people living on one built-up hectare in premodern, traditional towns and villages), it is possible to reach the total number of inhabitants. The population of [the Northern Kingdom of] Israel on both sides of the Jordan River in its peak prosperity in the middle of the eighth century can accordingly be estimated at 350,000—three times larger than the population of Judah of that time (Broshi and Finkelstein 1992)." [2] It should be noted that these estimates are highly speculative, and there is reason to believe that they underestimate the true population by a considerable amount. "Some of the densities recently put forward for area coefficients have been based on unwalled, premodern villages…. How similar is such a village to a walled Bronze or Iron Age town or city? Although this is not a case of comparing apples and oranges (more like oranges and grapefruit), it seems probable that the economic constraints of building a defensive system put a permanent physical limit on the settlement area," leading to higher population densities. [3] [1]: Finkelstein (2013:37-38) [2]: Finkelstein (2013:109-110) [3]: Zorn (1994:33) |
||||||
|
People. Early = 500-1000 / Middle = 5,000-15,000 / Late = 20,000-25,000
"At the smallest and least complex (in terms of population, geographic scale and decision-making arrangements) end of this continuum, chiefs with limited decision-making prerogatives probably presided over single settlements. In larger examples, more powerful leaders based in larger centers likely exerted varying degrees of control over multiple and varying numbers of settlements. Finally, at the most complex end of this continuum, paramount chiefs ruling from large regional centers with lesser chiefs as political subordinates dominated even larger polities containing numerous settlements and substantial populations. In the present context it seems most likely that chiefdoms of the first type were prevalent during the earlier phases of the Iron Age, with those of the latter two types developing with increasing frequency as time passed." [1] Early in period = same as the population of a single settlement at that time 1. Single settlement e.g. 5 ha settlement [2] at 200 per ha gives upper limit of 1000. [500-1000]: 1200-1000 BCE Later in period = population of a large settlement, plus population of numerous lesser settlements that have substantial populations 1. Large regional center e.g. 50 ha settlement [2] at 200 per ha gives upper limit of 10,000. [5,000-10,000]: 599-300 BCE 2. Numerous settlements and substantial populationse.g. settlement of 20 ha [2] at 200 per ha gives an upper limit of 4,000. 5 ha settlement [2] at 200 per ha gives upper limit of 1000. Multiple these figures by 3 to approximate "numerous lesser settlements" = 15,000 [1]: R. Brubaker, Aspects of mortuary variability in the South Indian Iron Age, in Bulletin of the Deccan College Post-Graduate & Research Institute 60-61, pp. 253-302 [2]: P. Peregrine, M. Ember (eds), Encyclopedia of Prehistory, vol. 8: South And Southwest Asia (2003), p. 365 |
||||||
|
People.
100,000: 1122 BCE; 5,000,000: 1045; [9,000,000-12,000,000]: 957 BCE; 13,500,000: 771 BCE McEvedy and Jones (1979) say after the Shang Empire population actually increased quickly so that by 400 BCE the figure for a definition of China - that included parts outside the Western Zhou - was 25 million. Their implied figure for the Shang Empire in 1045 BCE was 5 million. [1] Maisels suggests 13.5 million for Western Zhou. [2] Relevant page in Maisel’s book not now accessible via google books so cannot check for date. If figure was at peak, i.e. c950 BCE, that would be a jump of 8m in 100 years from 5m in 1045 BCE. Seems high even for territorial acquisitions. Perhaps 13.5 million reflects 771 BCE. Have instead coded a range for the population at the the peak date between the beginning and end figures. [1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1979, 172) [2]: (Maisels 2001, 260) |
||||||
|
People.
"The central hill country—between the Jezreel and the Beer-sheba Valleys—is well known archaeologically from both excavations and intensive survey projects. The surveys, mainly those conducted in the 1980s, revealed a massive wave of settlement that swept throughout this region in the Iron I (Finkelstein 1988; 1995; Zertal 1994; Ofer 1994). The main concentration of sites can be found in the northern part of this region, between Jerusalem and the Jezreel Valley. The settlement process may have started in the final phase of the Late Bronze Age (the late thirteenth or early twelfth centuries b.c.e.), accelerated in the early Iron I (the late twelfth to mid-eleventh century), and reached its peak in the late Iron I (the late eleventh and first half of the tenth centuries b.c.e.). In the late Iron I there were approximately 250 sites in this area (compared to ca. 30 sites in the Late Bronze Age), with a total built-up area that can be estimated at roughly 220 hectares (ca. 50 hectares in the Late Bronze Age). Using the broadly accepted, average density coefficient of two hundred people living on one built-up hectare in premodern societies, the late Iron I population can be estimated at circa 45,000 people." [1] "Estimation of population is based on the results of surface surveys; if done properly, the collection of pottery sherds at a given site can shed light on the size of the site in every period of habitation. Accordingly, one can draw a settlement map for a given period with all sites, classified according to size, and compute the total built-up area. Deploying a density coefficient (number of people living on one built-up hectare in premodern, traditional towns and villages), it is possible to reach the total number of inhabitants. The population of [the Northern Kingdom of] Israel on both sides of the Jordan River in its peak prosperity in the middle of the eighth century can accordingly be estimated at 350,000—three times larger than the population of Judah of that time (Broshi and Finkelstein 1992)." [2] It should be noted that these estimates are highly speculative, and there is reason to believe that they underestimate the true population by a considerable amount. "Some of the densities recently put forward for area coefficients have been based on unwalled, premodern villages…. How similar is such a village to a walled Bronze or Iron Age town or city? Although this is not a case of comparing apples and oranges (more like oranges and grapefruit), it seems probable that the economic constraints of building a defensive system put a permanent physical limit on the settlement area," leading to higher population densities. [3] [1]: Finkelstein (2013:37-38) [2]: Finkelstein (2013:109-110) [3]: Zorn (1994:33) |
||||||
|
People.
"The central hill country—between the Jezreel and the Beer-sheba Valleys—is well known archaeologically from both excavations and intensive survey projects. The surveys, mainly those conducted in the 1980s, revealed a massive wave of settlement that swept throughout this region in the Iron I (Finkelstein 1988; 1995; Zertal 1994; Ofer 1994). The main concentration of sites can be found in the northern part of this region, between Jerusalem and the Jezreel Valley. The settlement process may have started in the final phase of the Late Bronze Age (the late thirteenth or early twelfth centuries b.c.e.), accelerated in the early Iron I (the late twelfth to mid-eleventh century), and reached its peak in the late Iron I (the late eleventh and first half of the tenth centuries b.c.e.). In the late Iron I there were approximately 250 sites in this area (compared to ca. 30 sites in the Late Bronze Age), with a total built-up area that can be estimated at roughly 220 hectares (ca. 50 hectares in the Late Bronze Age). Using the broadly accepted, average density coefficient of two hundred people living on one built-up hectare in premodern societies, the late Iron I population can be estimated at circa 45,000 people." [1] "Estimation of population is based on the results of surface surveys; if done properly, the collection of pottery sherds at a given site can shed light on the size of the site in every period of habitation. Accordingly, one can draw a settlement map for a given period with all sites, classified according to size, and compute the total built-up area. Deploying a density coefficient (number of people living on one built-up hectare in premodern, traditional towns and villages), it is possible to reach the total number of inhabitants. The population of [the Northern Kingdom of] Israel on both sides of the Jordan River in its peak prosperity in the middle of the eighth century can accordingly be estimated at 350,000—three times larger than the population of Judah of that time (Broshi and Finkelstein 1992)." [2] It should be noted that these estimates are highly speculative, and there is reason to believe that they underestimate the true population by a considerable amount. "Some of the densities recently put forward for area coefficients have been based on unwalled, premodern villages…. How similar is such a village to a walled Bronze or Iron Age town or city? Although this is not a case of comparing apples and oranges (more like oranges and grapefruit), it seems probable that the economic constraints of building a defensive system put a permanent physical limit on the settlement area," leading to higher population densities. [3] [1]: Finkelstein (2013:37-38) [2]: Finkelstein (2013:109-110) [3]: Zorn (1994:33) |
||||||
|
People. Early = 500-1000 / Middle = 5,000-15,000 / Late = 20,000-25,000
"At the smallest and least complex (in terms of population, geographic scale and decision-making arrangements) end of this continuum, chiefs with limited decision-making prerogatives probably presided over single settlements. In larger examples, more powerful leaders based in larger centers likely exerted varying degrees of control over multiple and varying numbers of settlements. Finally, at the most complex end of this continuum, paramount chiefs ruling from large regional centers with lesser chiefs as political subordinates dominated even larger polities containing numerous settlements and substantial populations. In the present context it seems most likely that chiefdoms of the first type were prevalent during the earlier phases of the Iron Age, with those of the latter two types developing with increasing frequency as time passed." [1] Early in period = same as the population of a single settlement at that time 1. Single settlement e.g. 5 ha settlement [2] at 200 per ha gives upper limit of 1000. [500-1000]: 1200-1000 BCE Later in period = population of a large settlement, plus population of numerous lesser settlements that have substantial populations 1. Large regional center e.g. 50 ha settlement [2] at 200 per ha gives upper limit of 10,000. [5,000-10,000]: 599-300 BCE 2. Numerous settlements and substantial populationse.g. settlement of 20 ha [2] at 200 per ha gives an upper limit of 4,000. 5 ha settlement [2] at 200 per ha gives upper limit of 1000. Multiple these figures by 3 to approximate "numerous lesser settlements" = 15,000 [1]: R. Brubaker, Aspects of mortuary variability in the South Indian Iron Age, in Bulletin of the Deccan College Post-Graduate & Research Institute 60-61, pp. 253-302 [2]: P. Peregrine, M. Ember (eds), Encyclopedia of Prehistory, vol. 8: South And Southwest Asia (2003), p. 365 |
||||||
|
20-26 million at peak 6.2m km2.
[1]
15.5 million. 4 million "in Persia proper." [2] Table of modern estimates of the population of the Achaemenid Empire from Wiesehofer (2009). Low EstimatesEgypt 3.5mNear East (without Arabia) 12.0mCentral Asia and India 1.5mTotal 17.0m High EstimatesTotal 30-35m [3] [1]: (Broodbank 2015, 583) Broodbank, Cyprian. 2015. The Making of the Middle Sea. Thames & Hudson. London. [2]: (Stearns 2001, 40) [3]: (Wiesehofer 2009, 77) |
||||||
|
Inhabitants.
500 BCE same area as 600 BCE 400 BCE same area as 600 BCE 300 BCE polity territory of 25,000-30,000 at this time. Rome had a reported census population of perhaps 250,000. [1] The new territory conquered did not have a city as large as Rome and may not have been especially densely population - for example, no large river basin/delta etc. Would a reasonable estimate would be a range [500,000-1,000,000]? Population of 3,750,000 around 220 BCE [2] when Rome had most of Italy and some overseas possessions so it unlikely will be more than 1,000,000 based on these estimates. Rome [3] 100: 500 BCE 150: 400 BCE 250: 300 BCE Rome (reported census tallies) [1] c250,000: 300 BCE c210,000: 200 BCE c400,000: 100 BCE [1]: (Scheidel http://www.princeton.edu/~pswpc/pdfs/scheidel/070706.pdf [2]: (Dupuy and Dupuy 2007) [3]: (Modelski 2003, 49) |
||||||
|
20-26 million at peak 6.2m km2.
[1]
15.5 million. 4 million "in Persia proper." [2] Table of modern estimates of the population of the Achaemenid Empire from Wiesehofer (2009). Low EstimatesEgypt 3.5mNear East (without Arabia) 12.0mCentral Asia and India 1.5mTotal 17.0m High EstimatesTotal 30-35m [3] [1]: (Broodbank 2015, 583) Broodbank, Cyprian. 2015. The Making of the Middle Sea. Thames & Hudson. London. [2]: (Stearns 2001, 40) [3]: (Wiesehofer 2009, 77) |
||||||
|
Inhabitants.
500 BCE same area as 600 BCE 400 BCE same area as 600 BCE 300 BCE polity territory of 25,000-30,000 at this time. Rome had a reported census population of perhaps 250,000. [1] The new territory conquered did not have a city as large as Rome and may not have been especially densely population - for example, no large river basin/delta etc. Would a reasonable estimate would be a range [500,000-1,000,000]? Population of 3,750,000 around 220 BCE [2] when Rome had most of Italy and some overseas possessions so it unlikely will be more than 1,000,000 based on these estimates. Rome [3] 100: 500 BCE 150: 400 BCE 250: 300 BCE Rome (reported census tallies) [1] c250,000: 300 BCE c210,000: 200 BCE c400,000: 100 BCE [1]: (Scheidel http://www.princeton.edu/~pswpc/pdfs/scheidel/070706.pdf [2]: (Dupuy and Dupuy 2007) [3]: (Modelski 2003, 49) |
||||||
|
People.
According to McEvedy and Jones (1978) the total population of Siberia and Mongolia at this time did not exceed 400,000, while in Russian Turkestan in 1300 BC "we can think in terms of 100,000 people on the steppe." [1] The pre-Empire Xiongnu would have been a fraction of the total figure. 5-10% of 500,000 would provide an estimate of 25,000-50,000. This might represent an average of 20-40 groups covering this whole region. Since the time period 1400-300 BCE is extremely long I use this average for the 1400-500 BCE period and double it for the last 200 years prior to the rise of the Xiongnu Imperial Confederation. [1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 160-156) McEvedy, Colin. Jones, Richard. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books Ltd. London. |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
Inhabitants.
500 BCE same area as 600 BCE 400 BCE same area as 600 BCE 300 BCE polity territory of 25,000-30,000 at this time. Rome had a reported census population of perhaps 250,000. [1] The new territory conquered did not have a city as large as Rome and may not have been especially densely population - for example, no large river basin/delta etc. Would a reasonable estimate would be a range [500,000-1,000,000]? Population of 3,750,000 around 220 BCE [2] when Rome had most of Italy and some overseas possessions so it unlikely will be more than 1,000,000 based on these estimates. Rome [3] 100: 500 BCE 150: 400 BCE 250: 300 BCE Rome (reported census tallies) [1] c250,000: 300 BCE c210,000: 200 BCE c400,000: 100 BCE [1]: (Scheidel http://www.princeton.edu/~pswpc/pdfs/scheidel/070706.pdf [2]: (Dupuy and Dupuy 2007) [3]: (Modelski 2003, 49) |
||||||
|
{[3,000,000-5,000,000]; 2,500,000}: 100 BCE
TC: figures below refer to Egypt specfically: 3,000,000-5,000,000 Egypt 100 BCE. Fischer-Bovet book is out in 2014 Clarysse and Thompson [1] offer an estimate (for Egypt) of around 2.8 mln which is based upon census figures. F. Hassan provides an estimate for Egypt which is also less than 3 mln. W. Scheidel prefers a number closer to 5 mln. Encyclopaedia Britannica 2011 gives 3.5 mln. ca. BCE 100. [2] C. Fischer-Bovet, "Counting the Greeks in Egypt. Immigration in the first century of Ptolemaic rule," in Demography in the Graeco-Roman World, ed. C. Holleran and A. Pudsey. Cambridge, 2011, pp. 135-54 reviews earlier estimations, and suggests a population in the Third century BC of 4 mln, with Greeks representing ca. 5% of the total. Korotaev and Khaltourina’s estimated population dynamics of Egypt 300-1900 CE. [3] Korotaev and Khaltourina’s data (Egypt only)300 BCE: 3,000,000200 BCE: 4,000,000100 BCE: 2,500,0001 CE: 3,500,000 [1]: W. Clarysse and D. Thompson, Counting the People in Hellenistic Egypt. Cambridge, 2006 [2]: http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/180468/ancient-Egypt/22341/The-Ptolemaic-dynasty?anchor=ref936466 [3]: (Korotaev and Khaltourina 2006, 38) |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
Evidence of irrigation and the flourishing trade network seems to indicate a growth of population in the region controlled by the Indo-Greek Kingdom. However, this is largely speculative based on the current archaeological record. The description of Bactria as ’the land of a thousand cities’ does seem to imply a relatively dense population. So far, only two of these have seen extensive excavation.
[1]
There is also evidence that Bactria was fertile and extensively irrigated.
[2]
McEvedy and Jones [3] 200 BCE: Russian Turkestan: 1,000,000; Afghanistan 1,750,000. Highest density of population likely to be in the Greco-Bactrian region which contained cities. 126 BCE the Chinese chronicler Zhang Qian estimated "some 1,000,000 or more persons." [4] [1]: Fino, Elisabetta Valtz, ed. Afghanistan: Forging Civilizations Along the Silk Road. Buy this book, 2012. [2]: Gardin, J.C, The Development of Eastern Bactria in Pre-Classical Times, Purattava (10): 8-13 (1981) [3]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 155+163) [4]: (www.cemml.colostate.edu/cultural/09476/afgh02-06enl.html) |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
Priesler-Keller writes that due to a lack of empire-wide census, a population estimate of 5-7.5million is plausible for the Parthian Empire.
[1]
[50,000-100,000]: 200 BCE; 5,450,000: 100 BCE; {7,500,000; 15,000,000; 25,000,000}: 1 CE; 4,750,000: 100 CE; 5,000,000: 200 CE Estimates derived from McEvedy and Jones [2] 200 BCE - occupied the very south-west corner of Central Asia. McEvedy and Jones have 1,000,000 for the whole region at this time. Considering lack of major population center in this region, at most 10% of this total. 100 BCE - 200,000 in Central Asia, 1,250,000 in Iraq, 4,000,000 in Iran 1 CE - 500,000 in Central Asia, 2,000,000 in Afghanistan, 4,000,000 in Iran, 1,000,000 in Iraq, ? in Pakistan (mountains region). 100 CE - 3,750,000 in Iran, 1,000,000 in Iraq 200 CE - 4,000,000 in Iran, 1,000,000 in Iraq Maximum extent estimates 10-20 million - Durand (1977) [3] 25 million - Truxillo (2008) [4] [1]: (Priesler-Keller, Johannes. Personal Communication to Jill Levine, Dan Hoyer, and Peter Turchin. April 2020. Email. [2]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978) McEvedy, Colin. Jones, Richard. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books Ltd. [3]: (Korotaev 2006, 12) Korotaev, A. V. 2012. Introduction to Social Macrodynamics: Secular Cycles and Millennial Trends in Africa. Editorial URSS. [4]: (Truxillo 2008, 71) Truxillo, Charles A. 2008. Periods of World History: A Latin American Perspective. Jain Publishing Company. |
||||||
|
"Early on in the days of the Han Empire (206 BC - 220 AD) the population passed the 50m mark. But thereafter it was to stay in the band 45-60m for a thousand years.
[1]
Government census. 57,600,000 in 2 CE. 12 million family households. [2] Agricultural intensification: population growth occurred in Former Han despite no increase in available arable land. Population migration to south throughout period. [3] 60,000,000 at zenith. [4] [1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1979) [2]: (Keay 2009, 144) [3]: (Roberts 2003, 43-44) [4]: (Zhao 2015, 56) Zhao, Dingxin in Scheidel, Walter. ed. 2015. State Power in Ancient China and Rome. Oxford University Press. |
||||||
|
{[3,000,000-5,000,000]; 2,500,000}: 100 BCE
TC: figures below refer to Egypt specfically: 3,000,000-5,000,000 Egypt 100 BCE. Fischer-Bovet book is out in 2014 Clarysse and Thompson [1] offer an estimate (for Egypt) of around 2.8 mln which is based upon census figures. F. Hassan provides an estimate for Egypt which is also less than 3 mln. W. Scheidel prefers a number closer to 5 mln. Encyclopaedia Britannica 2011 gives 3.5 mln. ca. BCE 100. [2] C. Fischer-Bovet, "Counting the Greeks in Egypt. Immigration in the first century of Ptolemaic rule," in Demography in the Graeco-Roman World, ed. C. Holleran and A. Pudsey. Cambridge, 2011, pp. 135-54 reviews earlier estimations, and suggests a population in the Third century BC of 4 mln, with Greeks representing ca. 5% of the total. Korotaev and Khaltourina’s estimated population dynamics of Egypt 300-1900 CE. [3] Korotaev and Khaltourina’s data (Egypt only)300 BCE: 3,000,000200 BCE: 4,000,000100 BCE: 2,500,0001 CE: 3,500,000 [1]: W. Clarysse and D. Thompson, Counting the People in Hellenistic Egypt. Cambridge, 2006 [2]: http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/180468/ancient-Egypt/22341/The-Ptolemaic-dynasty?anchor=ref936466 [3]: (Korotaev and Khaltourina 2006, 38) |
||||||
|
{[3,000,000-5,000,000]; 2,500,000}: 100 BCE
TC: figures below refer to Egypt specfically: 3,000,000-5,000,000 Egypt 100 BCE. Fischer-Bovet book is out in 2014 Clarysse and Thompson [1] offer an estimate (for Egypt) of around 2.8 mln which is based upon census figures. F. Hassan provides an estimate for Egypt which is also less than 3 mln. W. Scheidel prefers a number closer to 5 mln. Encyclopaedia Britannica 2011 gives 3.5 mln. ca. BCE 100. [2] C. Fischer-Bovet, "Counting the Greeks in Egypt. Immigration in the first century of Ptolemaic rule," in Demography in the Graeco-Roman World, ed. C. Holleran and A. Pudsey. Cambridge, 2011, pp. 135-54 reviews earlier estimations, and suggests a population in the Third century BC of 4 mln, with Greeks representing ca. 5% of the total. Korotaev and Khaltourina’s estimated population dynamics of Egypt 300-1900 CE. [3] Korotaev and Khaltourina’s data (Egypt only)300 BCE: 3,000,000200 BCE: 4,000,000100 BCE: 2,500,0001 CE: 3,500,000 [1]: W. Clarysse and D. Thompson, Counting the People in Hellenistic Egypt. Cambridge, 2006 [2]: http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/180468/ancient-Egypt/22341/The-Ptolemaic-dynasty?anchor=ref936466 [3]: (Korotaev and Khaltourina 2006, 38) |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
Priesler-Keller writes that due to a lack of empire-wide census, a population estimate of 5-7.5million is plausible for the Parthian Empire.
[1]
[50,000-100,000]: 200 BCE; 5,450,000: 100 BCE; {7,500,000; 15,000,000; 25,000,000}: 1 CE; 4,750,000: 100 CE; 5,000,000: 200 CE Estimates derived from McEvedy and Jones [2] 200 BCE - occupied the very south-west corner of Central Asia. McEvedy and Jones have 1,000,000 for the whole region at this time. Considering lack of major population center in this region, at most 10% of this total. 100 BCE - 200,000 in Central Asia, 1,250,000 in Iraq, 4,000,000 in Iran 1 CE - 500,000 in Central Asia, 2,000,000 in Afghanistan, 4,000,000 in Iran, 1,000,000 in Iraq, ? in Pakistan (mountains region). 100 CE - 3,750,000 in Iran, 1,000,000 in Iraq 200 CE - 4,000,000 in Iran, 1,000,000 in Iraq Maximum extent estimates 10-20 million - Durand (1977) [3] 25 million - Truxillo (2008) [4] [1]: (Priesler-Keller, Johannes. Personal Communication to Jill Levine, Dan Hoyer, and Peter Turchin. April 2020. Email. [2]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978) McEvedy, Colin. Jones, Richard. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books Ltd. [3]: (Korotaev 2006, 12) Korotaev, A. V. 2012. Introduction to Social Macrodynamics: Secular Cycles and Millennial Trends in Africa. Editorial URSS. [4]: (Truxillo 2008, 71) Truxillo, Charles A. 2008. Periods of World History: A Latin American Perspective. Jain Publishing Company. |
||||||
|
Priesler-Keller writes that due to a lack of empire-wide census, a population estimate of 5-7.5million is plausible for the Parthian Empire.
[1]
[50,000-100,000]: 200 BCE; 5,450,000: 100 BCE; {7,500,000; 15,000,000; 25,000,000}: 1 CE; 4,750,000: 100 CE; 5,000,000: 200 CE Estimates derived from McEvedy and Jones [2] 200 BCE - occupied the very south-west corner of Central Asia. McEvedy and Jones have 1,000,000 for the whole region at this time. Considering lack of major population center in this region, at most 10% of this total. 100 BCE - 200,000 in Central Asia, 1,250,000 in Iraq, 4,000,000 in Iran 1 CE - 500,000 in Central Asia, 2,000,000 in Afghanistan, 4,000,000 in Iran, 1,000,000 in Iraq, ? in Pakistan (mountains region). 100 CE - 3,750,000 in Iran, 1,000,000 in Iraq 200 CE - 4,000,000 in Iran, 1,000,000 in Iraq Maximum extent estimates 10-20 million - Durand (1977) [3] 25 million - Truxillo (2008) [4] [1]: (Priesler-Keller, Johannes. Personal Communication to Jill Levine, Dan Hoyer, and Peter Turchin. April 2020. Email. [2]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978) McEvedy, Colin. Jones, Richard. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books Ltd. [3]: (Korotaev 2006, 12) Korotaev, A. V. 2012. Introduction to Social Macrodynamics: Secular Cycles and Millennial Trends in Africa. Editorial URSS. [4]: (Truxillo 2008, 71) Truxillo, Charles A. 2008. Periods of World History: A Latin American Perspective. Jain Publishing Company. |
||||||
|
Priesler-Keller writes that due to a lack of empire-wide census, a population estimate of 5-7.5million is plausible for the Parthian Empire.
[1]
[50,000-100,000]: 200 BCE; 5,450,000: 100 BCE; {7,500,000; 15,000,000; 25,000,000}: 1 CE; 4,750,000: 100 CE; 5,000,000: 200 CE Estimates derived from McEvedy and Jones [2] 200 BCE - occupied the very south-west corner of Central Asia. McEvedy and Jones have 1,000,000 for the whole region at this time. Considering lack of major population center in this region, at most 10% of this total. 100 BCE - 200,000 in Central Asia, 1,250,000 in Iraq, 4,000,000 in Iran 1 CE - 500,000 in Central Asia, 2,000,000 in Afghanistan, 4,000,000 in Iran, 1,000,000 in Iraq, ? in Pakistan (mountains region). 100 CE - 3,750,000 in Iran, 1,000,000 in Iraq 200 CE - 4,000,000 in Iran, 1,000,000 in Iraq Maximum extent estimates 10-20 million - Durand (1977) [3] 25 million - Truxillo (2008) [4] [1]: (Priesler-Keller, Johannes. Personal Communication to Jill Levine, Dan Hoyer, and Peter Turchin. April 2020. Email. [2]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978) McEvedy, Colin. Jones, Richard. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books Ltd. [3]: (Korotaev 2006, 12) Korotaev, A. V. 2012. Introduction to Social Macrodynamics: Secular Cycles and Millennial Trends in Africa. Editorial URSS. [4]: (Truxillo 2008, 71) Truxillo, Charles A. 2008. Periods of World History: A Latin American Perspective. Jain Publishing Company. |
||||||
|
Priesler-Keller writes that due to a lack of empire-wide census, a population estimate of 5-7.5million is plausible for the Parthian Empire.
[1]
[50,000-100,000]: 200 BCE; 5,450,000: 100 BCE; {7,500,000; 15,000,000; 25,000,000}: 1 CE; 4,750,000: 100 CE; 5,000,000: 200 CE Estimates derived from McEvedy and Jones [2] 200 BCE - occupied the very south-west corner of Central Asia. McEvedy and Jones have 1,000,000 for the whole region at this time. Considering lack of major population center in this region, at most 10% of this total. 100 BCE - 200,000 in Central Asia, 1,250,000 in Iraq, 4,000,000 in Iran 1 CE - 500,000 in Central Asia, 2,000,000 in Afghanistan, 4,000,000 in Iran, 1,000,000 in Iraq, ? in Pakistan (mountains region). 100 CE - 3,750,000 in Iran, 1,000,000 in Iraq 200 CE - 4,000,000 in Iran, 1,000,000 in Iraq Maximum extent estimates 10-20 million - Durand (1977) [3] 25 million - Truxillo (2008) [4] [1]: (Priesler-Keller, Johannes. Personal Communication to Jill Levine, Dan Hoyer, and Peter Turchin. April 2020. Email. [2]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978) McEvedy, Colin. Jones, Richard. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books Ltd. [3]: (Korotaev 2006, 12) Korotaev, A. V. 2012. Introduction to Social Macrodynamics: Secular Cycles and Millennial Trends in Africa. Editorial URSS. [4]: (Truxillo 2008, 71) Truxillo, Charles A. 2008. Periods of World History: A Latin American Perspective. Jain Publishing Company. |
||||||
|
"Early on in the days of the Han Empire (206 BC - 220 AD) the population passed the 50m mark. But thereafter it was to stay in the band 45-60m for a thousand years.
[1]
Government census. 57,600,000 in 2 CE. 12 million family households. [2] Agricultural intensification: population growth occurred in Former Han despite no increase in available arable land. Population migration to south throughout period. [3] 60,000,000 at zenith. [4] [1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1979) [2]: (Keay 2009, 144) [3]: (Roberts 2003, 43-44) [4]: (Zhao 2015, 56) Zhao, Dingxin in Scheidel, Walter. ed. 2015. State Power in Ancient China and Rome. Oxford University Press. |
||||||
|
Inhabitants. Data coded to make it easier for scraper to read.
The standard population is estimated at 50 to 60 million in 117 CE. The most common estimate for the empire population is around 60 million, but a figure of 150 million is also conceivable, though highly unlikely. [1] Another estimate is 50 million people (i.e. 5000 administrative units) at height. [2] 14 CE and 164 CE estimate based on: Frier, Bruce W. "Demography", in Alan K. Bowman, Peter Garnsey, and Dominic Rathbone, eds., The Cambridge Ancient History XI: The High Empire, A.D. 70-192, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000), 827-54. Imperial censuses 28 BCE - 48 CE [3] (These numbers (million) refer only to Roman citizens, who were a small proportion of the population): 4,063,000: 28 BCE 4,233,000: 8 BCE 4,937,000: 14 CE 5,894,000: 48 CE Roman population, by region 14 CE [4] [5] Italy: 6,000,000 Sicily: 600,000 Sardinia-Corsica: 500,000 Iberia: 6,000,000 Narbonensis: 1,500,000 Gaul: 3,400,000 Danube: 2,000,000 Greece: 3,000,000 Asia (province): 6,000,000 Asia Minor: 7,000,000 Syria: 6,000,000 Cyprus: 500,000 Egypt: 5,000,000 Cyrenaica: 500,000 Africa: 6,000,000Total: 54,000,000 Late Roman Empire: 74.9 million c.200 CE. coded as 55,000,000-70,000,000. DH says 75,000,000 too high. "The Late Roman Empire covered vast amounts of territory (estimated at 3.8 million km2; Issawi 1981: 377) and enjoyed a prolonged period of economic prosperity and demographic expansion between the death of Augustus (14 CE) and the second century. During this phase population density was situated in the upper possible margins of pre-modern times (at roughly 20 inhabitants per km2) with a total population in the magnitude of 74.9 million (Issawi 1981: 377). The anarchy and general economic disarray of the third century will have taken its toll on the population, but we can safely assume that at the beginning of the Byzantine period, in the early fourth century, the demographic state of the empire was similar to that in the second century." [6] [1]: (Scheidel 2004: 2-9) [2]: (Black 2008, 181)) [3]: (Brunt 1971, 1987) [4]: (Beloch (1886) Die Bevolkerung de griechnisch-romischen welt) [5]: (Russell 1958) [6]: (Stathakopoulos 2008, 310) Jeffreys E, Haldon J and Cormack R eds. 2008. The Oxford Handbook of Byzantine Studies. Oxford University Press. Oxford. |
||||||
|
People.
57.7 million in census of 2 CE. 48,000,000 in census of 140 CE - however data from three commanderies were missing in this census. [1] Annual population register figures: 2 CE: 57.7m (76% in north). 140 CE: 48m (54% in north). [2] "With the exception of Yuyang, where the resettlement of the Wuhuan and Xianbi led to a population increase, all commanderies show significant declines, many more than eighty or ninety percent...indicates a genuine decline in the Han population due to barbarian incursions." [3] Note: decline from Han leaving or being killed? From Bielenstein (1987): "The following national totals have been preserved for the Han dynasty", but there is some margin of error as is natural with historical censuses. 2 CE- 59,594,978 individuals 57 CE- 21,007,820 individuals 75 CE- 34,125,021 individuals 88 CE- 43,356,367 individuals 105 CE- 53,256,219 individuals 125 CE- 48,690,789 individuals 126-144 CE- 49,150,220 individuals 136-141 CE- 53,869,588 individuals 140 CE- 49,150,220 individuals 144 CE- 49,730,550 individuals 146 CE- 47,556,772 individuals 156 CE- 50,066,856 individuals 157 CE- 56,486,856 individuals [4] [1]: (Bielenstein 1986, 240) [2]: (Roberts 2003, 56-60) [3]: (Lewis 2000, 65) Lewis, Mark. 2000. The Han Abolition of Universal Military Service. in ed. Van de ven, Hans. Warfare in Chinese History. Brill. 33-76. [4]: (Bielenstein 1987: 12) Bielenstein, Hans. 1987. "Chinese Historical Demography AD 2-1982." Bulletin of the Museum of Far Antiquities 59: 1-139) |
||||||
|
People.
57.7 million in census of 2 CE. 48,000,000 in census of 140 CE - however data from three commanderies were missing in this census. [1] Annual population register figures: 2 CE: 57.7m (76% in north). 140 CE: 48m (54% in north). [2] "With the exception of Yuyang, where the resettlement of the Wuhuan and Xianbi led to a population increase, all commanderies show significant declines, many more than eighty or ninety percent...indicates a genuine decline in the Han population due to barbarian incursions." [3] Note: decline from Han leaving or being killed? From Bielenstein (1987): "The following national totals have been preserved for the Han dynasty", but there is some margin of error as is natural with historical censuses. 2 CE- 59,594,978 individuals 57 CE- 21,007,820 individuals 75 CE- 34,125,021 individuals 88 CE- 43,356,367 individuals 105 CE- 53,256,219 individuals 125 CE- 48,690,789 individuals 126-144 CE- 49,150,220 individuals 136-141 CE- 53,869,588 individuals 140 CE- 49,150,220 individuals 144 CE- 49,730,550 individuals 146 CE- 47,556,772 individuals 156 CE- 50,066,856 individuals 157 CE- 56,486,856 individuals [4] [1]: (Bielenstein 1986, 240) [2]: (Roberts 2003, 56-60) [3]: (Lewis 2000, 65) Lewis, Mark. 2000. The Han Abolition of Universal Military Service. in ed. Van de ven, Hans. Warfare in Chinese History. Brill. 33-76. [4]: (Bielenstein 1987: 12) Bielenstein, Hans. 1987. "Chinese Historical Demography AD 2-1982." Bulletin of the Museum of Far Antiquities 59: 1-139) |
||||||
|
People.
57.7 million in census of 2 CE. 48,000,000 in census of 140 CE - however data from three commanderies were missing in this census. [1] Annual population register figures: 2 CE: 57.7m (76% in north). 140 CE: 48m (54% in north). [2] "With the exception of Yuyang, where the resettlement of the Wuhuan and Xianbi led to a population increase, all commanderies show significant declines, many more than eighty or ninety percent...indicates a genuine decline in the Han population due to barbarian incursions." [3] Note: decline from Han leaving or being killed? From Bielenstein (1987): "The following national totals have been preserved for the Han dynasty", but there is some margin of error as is natural with historical censuses. 2 CE- 59,594,978 individuals 57 CE- 21,007,820 individuals 75 CE- 34,125,021 individuals 88 CE- 43,356,367 individuals 105 CE- 53,256,219 individuals 125 CE- 48,690,789 individuals 126-144 CE- 49,150,220 individuals 136-141 CE- 53,869,588 individuals 140 CE- 49,150,220 individuals 144 CE- 49,730,550 individuals 146 CE- 47,556,772 individuals 156 CE- 50,066,856 individuals 157 CE- 56,486,856 individuals [4] [1]: (Bielenstein 1986, 240) [2]: (Roberts 2003, 56-60) [3]: (Lewis 2000, 65) Lewis, Mark. 2000. The Han Abolition of Universal Military Service. in ed. Van de ven, Hans. Warfare in Chinese History. Brill. 33-76. [4]: (Bielenstein 1987: 12) Bielenstein, Hans. 1987. "Chinese Historical Demography AD 2-1982." Bulletin of the Museum of Far Antiquities 59: 1-139) |
||||||
|
No reliable estimates exist, although the population seems to have increased and a the number of cities in the northern steppe grew and prospered. Studies and excavations of cities also show a marked growth in the density and overall population size of the populations involved.
[1]
McEvedy and Jones [2] 100 CE Pakistan and North West India. 36m for Pakistan, India and Bangladesh. In 200 BC approximately 40% in the Ganges Basin. If roughly same proportions in 100 CE, and Kushans mostly outside the Ganges Basin, leaves 22 million for rest of India. Indus Basin likely to have been next most populous part of Indian sub-continent at this time. If, say, 25% total that would be 9m. Afghanistan 2m Transoxania 1.75m for Russian Turkestan 200 CE Pakistan and North West India. 39m for Pakistan, India and Bangladesh. In 200 BC approximately 40% in the Ganges Basin. If roughly same proportions in 100 CE, and Kushans mostly outside the Ganges Basin, leaves 23 million for rest of India. Indus Basin likely to have been next most populous part of Indian sub-continent at this time. If, say, 25% total that would be 10m. Afghanistan 2.25m Transoxania 1.75m for Russian Turkestan [1]: http://en.unesco.org/silkroad/sites/silkroad/files/knowledge-bank article/vol_II%20silk%20road_cities%20and%20urban%20life%20in%20the%20kushan%20kingdom.pdf [2]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 184+163+155) |
||||||
|
Priesler-Keller writes that due to a lack of empire-wide census, a population estimate of 5-7.5million is plausible for the Parthian Empire.
[1]
[50,000-100,000]: 200 BCE; 5,450,000: 100 BCE; {7,500,000; 15,000,000; 25,000,000}: 1 CE; 4,750,000: 100 CE; 5,000,000: 200 CE Estimates derived from McEvedy and Jones [2] 200 BCE - occupied the very south-west corner of Central Asia. McEvedy and Jones have 1,000,000 for the whole region at this time. Considering lack of major population center in this region, at most 10% of this total. 100 BCE - 200,000 in Central Asia, 1,250,000 in Iraq, 4,000,000 in Iran 1 CE - 500,000 in Central Asia, 2,000,000 in Afghanistan, 4,000,000 in Iran, 1,000,000 in Iraq, ? in Pakistan (mountains region). 100 CE - 3,750,000 in Iran, 1,000,000 in Iraq 200 CE - 4,000,000 in Iran, 1,000,000 in Iraq Maximum extent estimates 10-20 million - Durand (1977) [3] 25 million - Truxillo (2008) [4] [1]: (Priesler-Keller, Johannes. Personal Communication to Jill Levine, Dan Hoyer, and Peter Turchin. April 2020. Email. [2]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978) McEvedy, Colin. Jones, Richard. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books Ltd. [3]: (Korotaev 2006, 12) Korotaev, A. V. 2012. Introduction to Social Macrodynamics: Secular Cycles and Millennial Trends in Africa. Editorial URSS. [4]: (Truxillo 2008, 71) Truxillo, Charles A. 2008. Periods of World History: A Latin American Perspective. Jain Publishing Company. |
||||||
|
Inhabitants. Data coded to make it easier for scraper to read.
The standard population is estimated at 50 to 60 million in 117 CE. The most common estimate for the empire population is around 60 million, but a figure of 150 million is also conceivable, though highly unlikely. [1] Another estimate is 50 million people (i.e. 5000 administrative units) at height. [2] 14 CE and 164 CE estimate based on: Frier, Bruce W. "Demography", in Alan K. Bowman, Peter Garnsey, and Dominic Rathbone, eds., The Cambridge Ancient History XI: The High Empire, A.D. 70-192, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000), 827-54. Imperial censuses 28 BCE - 48 CE [3] (These numbers (million) refer only to Roman citizens, who were a small proportion of the population): 4,063,000: 28 BCE 4,233,000: 8 BCE 4,937,000: 14 CE 5,894,000: 48 CE Roman population, by region 14 CE [4] [5] Italy: 6,000,000 Sicily: 600,000 Sardinia-Corsica: 500,000 Iberia: 6,000,000 Narbonensis: 1,500,000 Gaul: 3,400,000 Danube: 2,000,000 Greece: 3,000,000 Asia (province): 6,000,000 Asia Minor: 7,000,000 Syria: 6,000,000 Cyprus: 500,000 Egypt: 5,000,000 Cyrenaica: 500,000 Africa: 6,000,000Total: 54,000,000 Late Roman Empire: 74.9 million c.200 CE. coded as 55,000,000-70,000,000. DH says 75,000,000 too high. "The Late Roman Empire covered vast amounts of territory (estimated at 3.8 million km2; Issawi 1981: 377) and enjoyed a prolonged period of economic prosperity and demographic expansion between the death of Augustus (14 CE) and the second century. During this phase population density was situated in the upper possible margins of pre-modern times (at roughly 20 inhabitants per km2) with a total population in the magnitude of 74.9 million (Issawi 1981: 377). The anarchy and general economic disarray of the third century will have taken its toll on the population, but we can safely assume that at the beginning of the Byzantine period, in the early fourth century, the demographic state of the empire was similar to that in the second century." [6] [1]: (Scheidel 2004: 2-9) [2]: (Black 2008, 181)) [3]: (Brunt 1971, 1987) [4]: (Beloch (1886) Die Bevolkerung de griechnisch-romischen welt) [5]: (Russell 1958) [6]: (Stathakopoulos 2008, 310) Jeffreys E, Haldon J and Cormack R eds. 2008. The Oxford Handbook of Byzantine Studies. Oxford University Press. Oxford. |
||||||
|
People.
57.7 million in census of 2 CE. 48,000,000 in census of 140 CE - however data from three commanderies were missing in this census. [1] Annual population register figures: 2 CE: 57.7m (76% in north). 140 CE: 48m (54% in north). [2] "With the exception of Yuyang, where the resettlement of the Wuhuan and Xianbi led to a population increase, all commanderies show significant declines, many more than eighty or ninety percent...indicates a genuine decline in the Han population due to barbarian incursions." [3] Note: decline from Han leaving or being killed? From Bielenstein (1987): "The following national totals have been preserved for the Han dynasty", but there is some margin of error as is natural with historical censuses. 2 CE- 59,594,978 individuals 57 CE- 21,007,820 individuals 75 CE- 34,125,021 individuals 88 CE- 43,356,367 individuals 105 CE- 53,256,219 individuals 125 CE- 48,690,789 individuals 126-144 CE- 49,150,220 individuals 136-141 CE- 53,869,588 individuals 140 CE- 49,150,220 individuals 144 CE- 49,730,550 individuals 146 CE- 47,556,772 individuals 156 CE- 50,066,856 individuals 157 CE- 56,486,856 individuals [4] [1]: (Bielenstein 1986, 240) [2]: (Roberts 2003, 56-60) [3]: (Lewis 2000, 65) Lewis, Mark. 2000. The Han Abolition of Universal Military Service. in ed. Van de ven, Hans. Warfare in Chinese History. Brill. 33-76. [4]: (Bielenstein 1987: 12) Bielenstein, Hans. 1987. "Chinese Historical Demography AD 2-1982." Bulletin of the Museum of Far Antiquities 59: 1-139) |
||||||
|
People.
57.7 million in census of 2 CE. 48,000,000 in census of 140 CE - however data from three commanderies were missing in this census. [1] Annual population register figures: 2 CE: 57.7m (76% in north). 140 CE: 48m (54% in north). [2] "With the exception of Yuyang, where the resettlement of the Wuhuan and Xianbi led to a population increase, all commanderies show significant declines, many more than eighty or ninety percent...indicates a genuine decline in the Han population due to barbarian incursions." [3] Note: decline from Han leaving or being killed? From Bielenstein (1987): "The following national totals have been preserved for the Han dynasty", but there is some margin of error as is natural with historical censuses. 2 CE- 59,594,978 individuals 57 CE- 21,007,820 individuals 75 CE- 34,125,021 individuals 88 CE- 43,356,367 individuals 105 CE- 53,256,219 individuals 125 CE- 48,690,789 individuals 126-144 CE- 49,150,220 individuals 136-141 CE- 53,869,588 individuals 140 CE- 49,150,220 individuals 144 CE- 49,730,550 individuals 146 CE- 47,556,772 individuals 156 CE- 50,066,856 individuals 157 CE- 56,486,856 individuals [4] [1]: (Bielenstein 1986, 240) [2]: (Roberts 2003, 56-60) [3]: (Lewis 2000, 65) Lewis, Mark. 2000. The Han Abolition of Universal Military Service. in ed. Van de ven, Hans. Warfare in Chinese History. Brill. 33-76. [4]: (Bielenstein 1987: 12) Bielenstein, Hans. 1987. "Chinese Historical Demography AD 2-1982." Bulletin of the Museum of Far Antiquities 59: 1-139) |
||||||
|
People.
57.7 million in census of 2 CE. 48,000,000 in census of 140 CE - however data from three commanderies were missing in this census. [1] Annual population register figures: 2 CE: 57.7m (76% in north). 140 CE: 48m (54% in north). [2] "With the exception of Yuyang, where the resettlement of the Wuhuan and Xianbi led to a population increase, all commanderies show significant declines, many more than eighty or ninety percent...indicates a genuine decline in the Han population due to barbarian incursions." [3] Note: decline from Han leaving or being killed? From Bielenstein (1987): "The following national totals have been preserved for the Han dynasty", but there is some margin of error as is natural with historical censuses. 2 CE- 59,594,978 individuals 57 CE- 21,007,820 individuals 75 CE- 34,125,021 individuals 88 CE- 43,356,367 individuals 105 CE- 53,256,219 individuals 125 CE- 48,690,789 individuals 126-144 CE- 49,150,220 individuals 136-141 CE- 53,869,588 individuals 140 CE- 49,150,220 individuals 144 CE- 49,730,550 individuals 146 CE- 47,556,772 individuals 156 CE- 50,066,856 individuals 157 CE- 56,486,856 individuals [4] [1]: (Bielenstein 1986, 240) [2]: (Roberts 2003, 56-60) [3]: (Lewis 2000, 65) Lewis, Mark. 2000. The Han Abolition of Universal Military Service. in ed. Van de ven, Hans. Warfare in Chinese History. Brill. 33-76. [4]: (Bielenstein 1987: 12) Bielenstein, Hans. 1987. "Chinese Historical Demography AD 2-1982." Bulletin of the Museum of Far Antiquities 59: 1-139) |
||||||
|
People.
57.7 million in census of 2 CE. 48,000,000 in census of 140 CE - however data from three commanderies were missing in this census. [1] Annual population register figures: 2 CE: 57.7m (76% in north). 140 CE: 48m (54% in north). [2] "With the exception of Yuyang, where the resettlement of the Wuhuan and Xianbi led to a population increase, all commanderies show significant declines, many more than eighty or ninety percent...indicates a genuine decline in the Han population due to barbarian incursions." [3] Note: decline from Han leaving or being killed? From Bielenstein (1987): "The following national totals have been preserved for the Han dynasty", but there is some margin of error as is natural with historical censuses. 2 CE- 59,594,978 individuals 57 CE- 21,007,820 individuals 75 CE- 34,125,021 individuals 88 CE- 43,356,367 individuals 105 CE- 53,256,219 individuals 125 CE- 48,690,789 individuals 126-144 CE- 49,150,220 individuals 136-141 CE- 53,869,588 individuals 140 CE- 49,150,220 individuals 144 CE- 49,730,550 individuals 146 CE- 47,556,772 individuals 156 CE- 50,066,856 individuals 157 CE- 56,486,856 individuals [4] [1]: (Bielenstein 1986, 240) [2]: (Roberts 2003, 56-60) [3]: (Lewis 2000, 65) Lewis, Mark. 2000. The Han Abolition of Universal Military Service. in ed. Van de ven, Hans. Warfare in Chinese History. Brill. 33-76. [4]: (Bielenstein 1987: 12) Bielenstein, Hans. 1987. "Chinese Historical Demography AD 2-1982." Bulletin of the Museum of Far Antiquities 59: 1-139) |
||||||
|
People.
57.7 million in census of 2 CE. 48,000,000 in census of 140 CE - however data from three commanderies were missing in this census. [1] Annual population register figures: 2 CE: 57.7m (76% in north). 140 CE: 48m (54% in north). [2] "With the exception of Yuyang, where the resettlement of the Wuhuan and Xianbi led to a population increase, all commanderies show significant declines, many more than eighty or ninety percent...indicates a genuine decline in the Han population due to barbarian incursions." [3] Note: decline from Han leaving or being killed? From Bielenstein (1987): "The following national totals have been preserved for the Han dynasty", but there is some margin of error as is natural with historical censuses. 2 CE- 59,594,978 individuals 57 CE- 21,007,820 individuals 75 CE- 34,125,021 individuals 88 CE- 43,356,367 individuals 105 CE- 53,256,219 individuals 125 CE- 48,690,789 individuals 126-144 CE- 49,150,220 individuals 136-141 CE- 53,869,588 individuals 140 CE- 49,150,220 individuals 144 CE- 49,730,550 individuals 146 CE- 47,556,772 individuals 156 CE- 50,066,856 individuals 157 CE- 56,486,856 individuals [4] [1]: (Bielenstein 1986, 240) [2]: (Roberts 2003, 56-60) [3]: (Lewis 2000, 65) Lewis, Mark. 2000. The Han Abolition of Universal Military Service. in ed. Van de ven, Hans. Warfare in Chinese History. Brill. 33-76. [4]: (Bielenstein 1987: 12) Bielenstein, Hans. 1987. "Chinese Historical Demography AD 2-1982." Bulletin of the Museum of Far Antiquities 59: 1-139) |
||||||
|
People.
57.7 million in census of 2 CE. 48,000,000 in census of 140 CE - however data from three commanderies were missing in this census. [1] Annual population register figures: 2 CE: 57.7m (76% in north). 140 CE: 48m (54% in north). [2] "With the exception of Yuyang, where the resettlement of the Wuhuan and Xianbi led to a population increase, all commanderies show significant declines, many more than eighty or ninety percent...indicates a genuine decline in the Han population due to barbarian incursions." [3] Note: decline from Han leaving or being killed? From Bielenstein (1987): "The following national totals have been preserved for the Han dynasty", but there is some margin of error as is natural with historical censuses. 2 CE- 59,594,978 individuals 57 CE- 21,007,820 individuals 75 CE- 34,125,021 individuals 88 CE- 43,356,367 individuals 105 CE- 53,256,219 individuals 125 CE- 48,690,789 individuals 126-144 CE- 49,150,220 individuals 136-141 CE- 53,869,588 individuals 140 CE- 49,150,220 individuals 144 CE- 49,730,550 individuals 146 CE- 47,556,772 individuals 156 CE- 50,066,856 individuals 157 CE- 56,486,856 individuals [4] [1]: (Bielenstein 1986, 240) [2]: (Roberts 2003, 56-60) [3]: (Lewis 2000, 65) Lewis, Mark. 2000. The Han Abolition of Universal Military Service. in ed. Van de ven, Hans. Warfare in Chinese History. Brill. 33-76. [4]: (Bielenstein 1987: 12) Bielenstein, Hans. 1987. "Chinese Historical Demography AD 2-1982." Bulletin of the Museum of Far Antiquities 59: 1-139) |
||||||
|
People.
57.7 million in census of 2 CE. 48,000,000 in census of 140 CE - however data from three commanderies were missing in this census. [1] Annual population register figures: 2 CE: 57.7m (76% in north). 140 CE: 48m (54% in north). [2] "With the exception of Yuyang, where the resettlement of the Wuhuan and Xianbi led to a population increase, all commanderies show significant declines, many more than eighty or ninety percent...indicates a genuine decline in the Han population due to barbarian incursions." [3] Note: decline from Han leaving or being killed? From Bielenstein (1987): "The following national totals have been preserved for the Han dynasty", but there is some margin of error as is natural with historical censuses. 2 CE- 59,594,978 individuals 57 CE- 21,007,820 individuals 75 CE- 34,125,021 individuals 88 CE- 43,356,367 individuals 105 CE- 53,256,219 individuals 125 CE- 48,690,789 individuals 126-144 CE- 49,150,220 individuals 136-141 CE- 53,869,588 individuals 140 CE- 49,150,220 individuals 144 CE- 49,730,550 individuals 146 CE- 47,556,772 individuals 156 CE- 50,066,856 individuals 157 CE- 56,486,856 individuals [4] [1]: (Bielenstein 1986, 240) [2]: (Roberts 2003, 56-60) [3]: (Lewis 2000, 65) Lewis, Mark. 2000. The Han Abolition of Universal Military Service. in ed. Van de ven, Hans. Warfare in Chinese History. Brill. 33-76. [4]: (Bielenstein 1987: 12) Bielenstein, Hans. 1987. "Chinese Historical Demography AD 2-1982." Bulletin of the Museum of Far Antiquities 59: 1-139) |
||||||
|
Priesler-Keller writes that due to a lack of empire-wide census, a population estimate of 5-7.5million is plausible for the Parthian Empire.
[1]
[50,000-100,000]: 200 BCE; 5,450,000: 100 BCE; {7,500,000; 15,000,000; 25,000,000}: 1 CE; 4,750,000: 100 CE; 5,000,000: 200 CE Estimates derived from McEvedy and Jones [2] 200 BCE - occupied the very south-west corner of Central Asia. McEvedy and Jones have 1,000,000 for the whole region at this time. Considering lack of major population center in this region, at most 10% of this total. 100 BCE - 200,000 in Central Asia, 1,250,000 in Iraq, 4,000,000 in Iran 1 CE - 500,000 in Central Asia, 2,000,000 in Afghanistan, 4,000,000 in Iran, 1,000,000 in Iraq, ? in Pakistan (mountains region). 100 CE - 3,750,000 in Iran, 1,000,000 in Iraq 200 CE - 4,000,000 in Iran, 1,000,000 in Iraq Maximum extent estimates 10-20 million - Durand (1977) [3] 25 million - Truxillo (2008) [4] [1]: (Priesler-Keller, Johannes. Personal Communication to Jill Levine, Dan Hoyer, and Peter Turchin. April 2020. Email. [2]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978) McEvedy, Colin. Jones, Richard. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books Ltd. [3]: (Korotaev 2006, 12) Korotaev, A. V. 2012. Introduction to Social Macrodynamics: Secular Cycles and Millennial Trends in Africa. Editorial URSS. [4]: (Truxillo 2008, 71) Truxillo, Charles A. 2008. Periods of World History: A Latin American Perspective. Jain Publishing Company. |
||||||
|
Inhabitants. Data coded to make it easier for scraper to read.
The standard population is estimated at 50 to 60 million in 117 CE. The most common estimate for the empire population is around 60 million, but a figure of 150 million is also conceivable, though highly unlikely. [1] Another estimate is 50 million people (i.e. 5000 administrative units) at height. [2] 14 CE and 164 CE estimate based on: Frier, Bruce W. "Demography", in Alan K. Bowman, Peter Garnsey, and Dominic Rathbone, eds., The Cambridge Ancient History XI: The High Empire, A.D. 70-192, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000), 827-54. Imperial censuses 28 BCE - 48 CE [3] (These numbers (million) refer only to Roman citizens, who were a small proportion of the population): 4,063,000: 28 BCE 4,233,000: 8 BCE 4,937,000: 14 CE 5,894,000: 48 CE Roman population, by region 14 CE [4] [5] Italy: 6,000,000 Sicily: 600,000 Sardinia-Corsica: 500,000 Iberia: 6,000,000 Narbonensis: 1,500,000 Gaul: 3,400,000 Danube: 2,000,000 Greece: 3,000,000 Asia (province): 6,000,000 Asia Minor: 7,000,000 Syria: 6,000,000 Cyprus: 500,000 Egypt: 5,000,000 Cyrenaica: 500,000 Africa: 6,000,000Total: 54,000,000 Late Roman Empire: 74.9 million c.200 CE. coded as 55,000,000-70,000,000. DH says 75,000,000 too high. "The Late Roman Empire covered vast amounts of territory (estimated at 3.8 million km2; Issawi 1981: 377) and enjoyed a prolonged period of economic prosperity and demographic expansion between the death of Augustus (14 CE) and the second century. During this phase population density was situated in the upper possible margins of pre-modern times (at roughly 20 inhabitants per km2) with a total population in the magnitude of 74.9 million (Issawi 1981: 377). The anarchy and general economic disarray of the third century will have taken its toll on the population, but we can safely assume that at the beginning of the Byzantine period, in the early fourth century, the demographic state of the empire was similar to that in the second century." [6] [1]: (Scheidel 2004: 2-9) [2]: (Black 2008, 181)) [3]: (Brunt 1971, 1987) [4]: (Beloch (1886) Die Bevolkerung de griechnisch-romischen welt) [5]: (Russell 1958) [6]: (Stathakopoulos 2008, 310) Jeffreys E, Haldon J and Cormack R eds. 2008. The Oxford Handbook of Byzantine Studies. Oxford University Press. Oxford. |
||||||
|
No reliable estimates exist, although the population seems to have increased and a the number of cities in the northern steppe grew and prospered. Studies and excavations of cities also show a marked growth in the density and overall population size of the populations involved.
[1]
McEvedy and Jones [2] 100 CE Pakistan and North West India. 36m for Pakistan, India and Bangladesh. In 200 BC approximately 40% in the Ganges Basin. If roughly same proportions in 100 CE, and Kushans mostly outside the Ganges Basin, leaves 22 million for rest of India. Indus Basin likely to have been next most populous part of Indian sub-continent at this time. If, say, 25% total that would be 9m. Afghanistan 2m Transoxania 1.75m for Russian Turkestan 200 CE Pakistan and North West India. 39m for Pakistan, India and Bangladesh. In 200 BC approximately 40% in the Ganges Basin. If roughly same proportions in 100 CE, and Kushans mostly outside the Ganges Basin, leaves 23 million for rest of India. Indus Basin likely to have been next most populous part of Indian sub-continent at this time. If, say, 25% total that would be 10m. Afghanistan 2.25m Transoxania 1.75m for Russian Turkestan [1]: http://en.unesco.org/silkroad/sites/silkroad/files/knowledge-bank article/vol_II%20silk%20road_cities%20and%20urban%20life%20in%20the%20kushan%20kingdom.pdf [2]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 184+163+155) |
||||||
|
Whole of Japan = 1m in 300 CE, 1.5m in 400 CE, 1.75m in 500 CE, 3m in 600 CE, 3.5m in 700 CE.
[1]
Figure for 250-599 CE = 16.8% of Japan estimate (assumes equal density per km2) An estimation of the population size in Japan between 300 BCE-700 CE was provided by Koyama [2] on the basis of his demographic study on the forty-seven-volume "National Site Maps" published by the Japanese government in 1965. During the Yayoi and Kofun periods around 16.8 % of Japan’s population lived in the Kansai region [3] . Figure for 600-710 CE = estimate for southern half of Japan (assumes slightly higher density per km2 in southern half, using half of Japan figure as baseline of range) Centers in Kyushu (south west Japan) and Nara-Osaka-Kobe area until 600 CE when unified by a bureaucracy and Buddhism. So 250-599 CE = Nara-Osaka-Kobe, whilst 600-710 CE = Nara-Osaka-Kobe + Kyushu (south west Japan)."The other main centre was in the fertile, but circumscribed, alluvial systems of the Nara-Osaka-Kobe area, where status differentiation appears instead to have been based on hereditary ritual authority. The fusion of these geographical power-bases had occurred by about A.D. 600, by which time a well-developed bureaucracy in the Nara basin was exerting its authority and promoting Buddhism as a unifying ideology for the new regime, thus replacing the ritual authority vested in earlier individual rulers." [4] [1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978) McEvedy, Colin. Jones, Richard. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books Ltd. London. [2]: Koyama, S., 1978. Jomon Subsistence and Population. Senri Ethnological Studies 2. Osaka: National Museum of Ethnology [3]: Kidder, J. E., 2007. Himiko and Japan’s elusive chiefdom of Yamatai: archaeology, history, and mythology. University of Hawaii Press, 60. [4]: (Ikawa-Smith 1985, 396) Ikawa-Smith, Fumiko in Misra, Virenda N. Bellwood, Peter S. 1985. Recent Advances in Indo-Pacific Prehistory: Proceedings of the International Symposium Held at Poona, December 19-21, 1978. BRILL. |
||||||
|
The most common general estimate for the empire population is around 60 million, but a figure of 150 million is also conceivable, though highly unlikely
[1]
. Another estimate is 50 million people (i.e. 5000 administrative units at height.
[2]
. According to a graph by McEvedy and Jones between 200 CE and 400 CE population of the Roman Empire decreased from about 45 million to 35 million
[3]
.
70 million c.300 CE? "The Late Roman Empire covered vast amounts of territory (estimated at 3.8 million km2; Issawi 1981: 377) and enjoyed a prolonged period of economic prosperity and demographic expansion between the death of Augustus (14 CE) and the second century. During this phase population density was situated in the upper possible margins of pre-modern times (at roughly 20 inhabitants per km2) with a total population in the magnitude of 74.9 million (Issawi 1981: 377). The anarchy and general economic disarray of the third century will have taken its toll on the population, but we can safely assume that at the beginning of the Byzantine period, in the early fourth century, the demographic state of the empire was similar to that in the second century." [4] [1]: (Scheidel 2004: 2-9) [2]: (Black 2008, 181) [3]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 127) [4]: (Stathakopoulos 2008, 310) Jeffreys E, Haldon J and Cormack R eds. 2008. The Oxford Handbook of Byzantine Studies. Oxford University Press. Oxford. |
||||||
|
People.
(541/542: Plague epidemic, returns all 10-15 years until ca. 750) 395: 15 Million 534: 20 Million 552: 17 Million 568: 14 Million 591: 15 Million 610: 12.5 Million 620: 7 Million 630: 11 Million East Roman Empire 4th and 5th Centuries "In an estimated realm covering some 1.4 million km2 with a population density at 20 inhabitants per km2 this would amount to roughly 28 million inhabitants (Koder 1984/2001:154, between 24 and 26 million; Stein 1949-51: 154, 26 million)." [1] Estimates based on McEvedy and Jones (1978). [2] 14,150,000: 400 CE; 13,400,000: 450 CE; 12,900,000: 500 CE; [16,500,000-17,500,000]: 550 CE; [17,000,000-22,000,000]: 600 CE; 400 CE Greece and Balkans 2m, Anatolia 6m, Levant 1.75m+0.4m, Egypt 4m 450 CE Greece and Balkans 2m, Anatolia 5.75m, Levant 1.5m+0.4m, Egypt 3.75m 500 CE Greece and Balkans 2m, Anatolia 5.5m, Levant 1.5m+0.4m, Egypt 3.5m 550 CE Greece and Balkans 2m, Anatolia 5.25m, Levant 1.5m+0.4m, Egypt 3.25m, North Africa 1m+1.75m+1m+0.4m, Mediterranean islands ?m and southern Italy ?m. 600 CE Greece and Balkans extending to Italy (including Bosnia, Serbia, Croatia, Slovenia) 3m, Anatolia 5m, Levant 1.5m+0.4m, Egypt 3m, North Africa 1m+1.75m+1m+0.4m, Mediterranean islands ?m and southern Italy ?m, southern coast of Spain ?m, north-east Italy ?m. 650 CE Greece and Balkans extending to Italy (including Bosnia, Serbia, Croatia, Slovenia) 3m, Anatolia 5.25m now extending into the Caucasus 0.25m, southern Crimea, North Africa 1.25m+1.75m+1m+0.5m, Mediterranean islands ?m and southern Italy ?m, Ravenna region north-east Italy ?m. [1]: (Stathakopoulos 2008, 310) Jeffreys E, Haldon J and Cormack R eds. 2008. The Oxford Handbook of Byzantine Studies. Oxford University Press. Oxford. [2]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978) McEvedy, C. Jones, R. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Allen Lane. London. |
||||||
|
Whole of Japan = 1m in 300 CE, 1.5m in 400 CE, 1.75m in 500 CE, 3m in 600 CE, 3.5m in 700 CE.
[1]
Figure for 250-599 CE = 16.8% of Japan estimate (assumes equal density per km2) An estimation of the population size in Japan between 300 BCE-700 CE was provided by Koyama [2] on the basis of his demographic study on the forty-seven-volume "National Site Maps" published by the Japanese government in 1965. During the Yayoi and Kofun periods around 16.8 % of Japan’s population lived in the Kansai region [3] . Figure for 600-710 CE = estimate for southern half of Japan (assumes slightly higher density per km2 in southern half, using half of Japan figure as baseline of range) Centers in Kyushu (south west Japan) and Nara-Osaka-Kobe area until 600 CE when unified by a bureaucracy and Buddhism. So 250-599 CE = Nara-Osaka-Kobe, whilst 600-710 CE = Nara-Osaka-Kobe + Kyushu (south west Japan)."The other main centre was in the fertile, but circumscribed, alluvial systems of the Nara-Osaka-Kobe area, where status differentiation appears instead to have been based on hereditary ritual authority. The fusion of these geographical power-bases had occurred by about A.D. 600, by which time a well-developed bureaucracy in the Nara basin was exerting its authority and promoting Buddhism as a unifying ideology for the new regime, thus replacing the ritual authority vested in earlier individual rulers." [4] [1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978) McEvedy, Colin. Jones, Richard. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books Ltd. London. [2]: Koyama, S., 1978. Jomon Subsistence and Population. Senri Ethnological Studies 2. Osaka: National Museum of Ethnology [3]: Kidder, J. E., 2007. Himiko and Japan’s elusive chiefdom of Yamatai: archaeology, history, and mythology. University of Hawaii Press, 60. [4]: (Ikawa-Smith 1985, 396) Ikawa-Smith, Fumiko in Misra, Virenda N. Bellwood, Peter S. 1985. Recent Advances in Indo-Pacific Prehistory: Proceedings of the International Symposium Held at Poona, December 19-21, 1978. BRILL. |
||||||
|
People.
Estimates based on McEvedy and Jones (1978) [1] 500 CE: Iraq 1.1m, Iran 4.5m, Afghanistan 2.5m, Transoxania (southern part) 0.5m?, Caucasia 0.3m. 600 CE: Iran 5m, Iraq 1m, Transoxania (southern part) 1m, Afghanistan 2.5m, Yemen, Oman and Gulf Coast 2.8m, Caucasia 0.4m need to add Pakistan ?m 620 CE: Iran 5m, Afghanistan 2.5m, Iraq 1m, Caucasia 0.4m, Yemen, Oman and Gulf Coast 2.8m, Anatolia 5m, Egypt 3.0m, Palestine and Jordan 0.4m, Transoxania (part) 1m. need to add Pakistan ?m [1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978) McEvedy, Colin. Jones, Richard. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books Ltd. |
||||||
|
The total size of the Hephthalite population is unknown. In the territory of Tokharistan there were reportedly 5,000-6,000 Hephthalite warriors. This could suggest a population of 50,000 individuals if the extended family groups were included, although this would have been experienced considerable fluctuations with the increase and decrease of the number of affiliated tribes and fortune of the Hepthalite.
[1]
McEvedy and Jones (1978) 26,500,000: 500 CE [2] Russian Tukestan 1,000,000: 400-600 CE Pakistan, India and Bangladesh: 45,000,000: 400 CE; 50,000,000: 500 CE. In 200 BC approximately 40% in the Ganges Basin which would translate to 20m in 500 CE. Hephthalites held Upper and Middle Gangers Basin so perhaps two-thirds (13m) under Hephthalite control. Indus Basin likely to have been next most populous part of Indian sub-continent at this time. If 25% of the total: 12.5m. [1]: Litvinsky B.A.,Guang-da Zhang , and Shabani Samghabadi R. (eds)History of Civilizations of Central Asia: The Crossroads of Civilizations: A.D. 250 to 750 Vol. 3, 1999 pp. 138-141 [2]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978) |
||||||
|
People.
"On the eve of the Six Garrisons revolt [in 523], Northern Wei had a registered population of approximately 5,000,000 households and 32,000,000 individuals." [1] Storing this data here until I create pages for these polities Western Han (end): 57,000,000. Sui Dynasty: 46,000,000. Tang (height of power 742 CE): 49,000,000. [2] [1]: (Graff 2002, 127) [2]: (Graff 2002, 10) |
||||||
|
People.
(541/542: Plague epidemic, returns all 10-15 years until ca. 750) 395: 15 Million 534: 20 Million 552: 17 Million 568: 14 Million 591: 15 Million 610: 12.5 Million 620: 7 Million 630: 11 Million East Roman Empire 4th and 5th Centuries "In an estimated realm covering some 1.4 million km2 with a population density at 20 inhabitants per km2 this would amount to roughly 28 million inhabitants (Koder 1984/2001:154, between 24 and 26 million; Stein 1949-51: 154, 26 million)." [1] Estimates based on McEvedy and Jones (1978). [2] 14,150,000: 400 CE; 13,400,000: 450 CE; 12,900,000: 500 CE; [16,500,000-17,500,000]: 550 CE; [17,000,000-22,000,000]: 600 CE; 400 CE Greece and Balkans 2m, Anatolia 6m, Levant 1.75m+0.4m, Egypt 4m 450 CE Greece and Balkans 2m, Anatolia 5.75m, Levant 1.5m+0.4m, Egypt 3.75m 500 CE Greece and Balkans 2m, Anatolia 5.5m, Levant 1.5m+0.4m, Egypt 3.5m 550 CE Greece and Balkans 2m, Anatolia 5.25m, Levant 1.5m+0.4m, Egypt 3.25m, North Africa 1m+1.75m+1m+0.4m, Mediterranean islands ?m and southern Italy ?m. 600 CE Greece and Balkans extending to Italy (including Bosnia, Serbia, Croatia, Slovenia) 3m, Anatolia 5m, Levant 1.5m+0.4m, Egypt 3m, North Africa 1m+1.75m+1m+0.4m, Mediterranean islands ?m and southern Italy ?m, southern coast of Spain ?m, north-east Italy ?m. 650 CE Greece and Balkans extending to Italy (including Bosnia, Serbia, Croatia, Slovenia) 3m, Anatolia 5.25m now extending into the Caucasus 0.25m, southern Crimea, North Africa 1.25m+1.75m+1m+0.5m, Mediterranean islands ?m and southern Italy ?m, Ravenna region north-east Italy ?m. [1]: (Stathakopoulos 2008, 310) Jeffreys E, Haldon J and Cormack R eds. 2008. The Oxford Handbook of Byzantine Studies. Oxford University Press. Oxford. [2]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978) McEvedy, C. Jones, R. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Allen Lane. London. |
||||||
|
Inhabitants. Estimated from McEvedy and Jones
[1]
, c500 CE from Italy (4) and Yugoslavia (1.5)
Ostrogothic Italy saw "demographic decline". [2] Ostrogoth people at time of the invasion of Italy 488 CE: "As in the Macedonian campaign, so now, he was accompanied by all the members of his nation, old men and children, mothers and maidens, and doubtless by a long train of waggons. We have no accurate information whatever as to the number of his army, but various indications, both in earlier and later history, seem to justify us in assuming that the soldiers must have numbered fully 40,000; and if this was the case, the whole nation cannot have been less than 200,000. The difficulty of finding food for so great a multitude in the often desolated plains of Pannonia and Noricum must have been enormous, and was no doubt the reason of the slowness of Theodoric’s progress." [3] Unknown source says the kingdom has a population of 225,000 [4] . This number must refer to the number of Ostrogoths rather than the total number of individuals within the territory of the Ostrogoth Kingdom in Italy. "Cities along the route either closed their gates or could not provide a market capable of sustaining perhaps 40,000 hungry people." [5] [1]: (McEverdy and Jones 1978) [2]: (Arnold, Bjornlie and Sessa 2016, 1) Arnold, Jonathan J. Bjornlie, Shane M. Sessa, Kristina. eds. 2016. A Companion to Ostrogothic Italy. BRILL. Leiden. [3]: (Hodgkin 1897) [4]: (Unknown) [5]: (Burns 1991, 65) |
||||||
|
Whole of Japan = 1m in 300 CE, 1.5m in 400 CE, 1.75m in 500 CE, 3m in 600 CE, 3.5m in 700 CE.
[1]
Figure for 250-599 CE = 16.8% of Japan estimate (assumes equal density per km2) An estimation of the population size in Japan between 300 BCE-700 CE was provided by Koyama [2] on the basis of his demographic study on the forty-seven-volume "National Site Maps" published by the Japanese government in 1965. During the Yayoi and Kofun periods around 16.8 % of Japan’s population lived in the Kansai region [3] . Figure for 600-710 CE = estimate for southern half of Japan (assumes slightly higher density per km2 in southern half, using half of Japan figure as baseline of range) Centers in Kyushu (south west Japan) and Nara-Osaka-Kobe area until 600 CE when unified by a bureaucracy and Buddhism. So 250-599 CE = Nara-Osaka-Kobe, whilst 600-710 CE = Nara-Osaka-Kobe + Kyushu (south west Japan)."The other main centre was in the fertile, but circumscribed, alluvial systems of the Nara-Osaka-Kobe area, where status differentiation appears instead to have been based on hereditary ritual authority. The fusion of these geographical power-bases had occurred by about A.D. 600, by which time a well-developed bureaucracy in the Nara basin was exerting its authority and promoting Buddhism as a unifying ideology for the new regime, thus replacing the ritual authority vested in earlier individual rulers." [4] [1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978) McEvedy, Colin. Jones, Richard. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books Ltd. London. [2]: Koyama, S., 1978. Jomon Subsistence and Population. Senri Ethnological Studies 2. Osaka: National Museum of Ethnology [3]: Kidder, J. E., 2007. Himiko and Japan’s elusive chiefdom of Yamatai: archaeology, history, and mythology. University of Hawaii Press, 60. [4]: (Ikawa-Smith 1985, 396) Ikawa-Smith, Fumiko in Misra, Virenda N. Bellwood, Peter S. 1985. Recent Advances in Indo-Pacific Prehistory: Proceedings of the International Symposium Held at Poona, December 19-21, 1978. BRILL. |
||||||
|
Whole of Japan = 1m in 300 CE, 1.5m in 400 CE, 1.75m in 500 CE, 3m in 600 CE, 3.5m in 700 CE.
[1]
or 5m in 700 CE. 16.8% in Kansai region during Yayoi and Kofun period.
[2]
Figure for 600-710 CE = estimate for southern half of Japan Centers in Kyushu (south west Japan) and Nara-Osaka-Kobe area until 600 CE when unified by a bureaucracy and Buddhism. So 250-599 CE = Nara-Osaka-Kobe, whilst 600-710 CE = Nara-Osaka-Kobe + Kyushu (south west Japan)."The other main centre was in the fertile, but circumscribed, alluvial systems of the Nara-Osaka-Kobe area, where status differentiation appears instead to have been based on hereditary ritual authority. The fusion of these geographical power-bases had occurred by about A.D. 600, by which time a well-developed bureaucracy in the Nara basin was exerting its authority and promoting Buddhism as a unifying ideology for the new regime, thus replacing the ritual authority vested in earlier individual rulers." [3] 900,000 in Japan 300 BCE - 700 CE an estimation of the population size in Japan between 300 BCE-700 CE was provided by Koyama [4] on the basis of his demographic study on the forty-seven-volume "National Site Maps" published by the Japanese government in 1965. During the Yayoi and Kofun periods around 16.8 % of Japan’s population lived in the Kansai region [5] . 5,000,000 in whole archipelago 700 CE "In the case of ritsuryo Japan, demographers combine the few surviving local census figures with scattered records of agricultural output to estimate the archipelago’s overall population as of 700 CE at about 5,000,000. For the next three centuries or so the number seems to have fluctuated in the five to six million range and then gradually risen to perhaps seven million by 1150." [2] [1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978) McEvedy, Colin. Jones, Richard. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books Ltd. London. [2]: (Totman 2004, 83) Totman, Conrad D. 2004. Pre-Industrial Korea and Japan in Environmental Perspective. BRILL. [3]: (Ikawa-Smith 1985, 396) Ikawa-Smith, Fumiko in Misra, Virenda N. Bellwood, Peter S. 1985. Recent Advances in Indo-Pacific Prehistory: Proceedings of the International Symposium Held at Poona, December 19-21, 1978. BRILL. [4]: Koyama, S., 1978. Jomon Subsistence and Population. Senri Ethnological Studies 2. Osaka: National Museum of Ethnology [5]: Kidder, J. E., 2007. Himiko and Japan’s elusive chiefdom of Yamatai: archaeology, history, and mythology. University of Hawaii Press, 60. |
||||||
|
People.
Estimates based on McEvedy and Jones (1978) [1] 500 CE: Iraq 1.1m, Iran 4.5m, Afghanistan 2.5m, Transoxania (southern part) 0.5m?, Caucasia 0.3m. 600 CE: Iran 5m, Iraq 1m, Transoxania (southern part) 1m, Afghanistan 2.5m, Yemen, Oman and Gulf Coast 2.8m, Caucasia 0.4m need to add Pakistan ?m 620 CE: Iran 5m, Afghanistan 2.5m, Iraq 1m, Caucasia 0.4m, Yemen, Oman and Gulf Coast 2.8m, Anatolia 5m, Egypt 3.0m, Palestine and Jordan 0.4m, Transoxania (part) 1m. need to add Pakistan ?m [1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978) McEvedy, Colin. Jones, Richard. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books Ltd. |
||||||
|
People.
History of the Sui Dynasty reports 46,000,000 in 609 CE. [1] "The Sui empire reached the pinnacle of its power in 609 when its population peaked." [2] 37,000,000: 705 CE under Tang. [3] [1]: (Graff 2002, 148) Graff, D A. 2002. Medieval Chinese Warfare, 300-900. Routledge. London. [2]: (Xiong 2006, 54) [3]: (Rodzinski 1979, 129) Rodzinski, W. 1979. A History of China. Volume I. Pergamon Press. Oxford. |
||||||
|
Merovingian kingdoms was a quasi-polity in terms of population that could be militarily controlled. This figure represents the average sized kingdom within the polity.
Total divided by six regions. [5,000,000-7,000,000] Estimated from below. Population of France [1] 400 CE = 5 500 CE = 4.75 600 CE = 4.5 700 CE = 4.75 800 CE = 5 Population of Belgium and Luxembourg [2] 400 CE = 0.3 500 CE = 0.3 600 CE = 0.3 700 CE = 0.3 800 CE = 0.3 Population of Netherlands [3] 400 CE = 0.2 500 CE = 0.2 600 CE = 0.2 700 CE = 0.2 800 CE = 0.2 Population of Germany [4] 400 CE = 3.5 500 CE = 3.25 600 CE = 3.0 700 CE = 3.0 800 CE = 3.25 Merovingian South West Germany. "activity radius of about 1km around early Neolithic settlements. This gives an area of slightly over 3 km2, of which 10 percent were fields and gardens. It was exploited by about 100 individuals (Kuster 1995:76-7). This implied a population density of about 30 inhabitants per km2. If we assume one settlement with about 200 inhabitants and some smaller settlements in one Gemarkung, we obtain a figure of 50-60 inhabitants per km2 for the Merovingian period." [5] [1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 57) McEvedy, C and Jones, R. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Allen Lane. London. [2]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 63) [3]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 65) [4]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 69) [5]: (Damminger in Wood ed. 1998, 69) |
||||||
|
People.
(541/542: Plague epidemic, returns all 10-15 years until ca. 750) 395: 15 Million 534: 20 Million 552: 17 Million 568: 14 Million 591: 15 Million 610: 12.5 Million 620: 7 Million 630: 11 Million East Roman Empire 4th and 5th Centuries "In an estimated realm covering some 1.4 million km2 with a population density at 20 inhabitants per km2 this would amount to roughly 28 million inhabitants (Koder 1984/2001:154, between 24 and 26 million; Stein 1949-51: 154, 26 million)." [1] Estimates based on McEvedy and Jones (1978). [2] 14,150,000: 400 CE; 13,400,000: 450 CE; 12,900,000: 500 CE; [16,500,000-17,500,000]: 550 CE; [17,000,000-22,000,000]: 600 CE; 400 CE Greece and Balkans 2m, Anatolia 6m, Levant 1.75m+0.4m, Egypt 4m 450 CE Greece and Balkans 2m, Anatolia 5.75m, Levant 1.5m+0.4m, Egypt 3.75m 500 CE Greece and Balkans 2m, Anatolia 5.5m, Levant 1.5m+0.4m, Egypt 3.5m 550 CE Greece and Balkans 2m, Anatolia 5.25m, Levant 1.5m+0.4m, Egypt 3.25m, North Africa 1m+1.75m+1m+0.4m, Mediterranean islands ?m and southern Italy ?m. 600 CE Greece and Balkans extending to Italy (including Bosnia, Serbia, Croatia, Slovenia) 3m, Anatolia 5m, Levant 1.5m+0.4m, Egypt 3m, North Africa 1m+1.75m+1m+0.4m, Mediterranean islands ?m and southern Italy ?m, southern coast of Spain ?m, north-east Italy ?m. 650 CE Greece and Balkans extending to Italy (including Bosnia, Serbia, Croatia, Slovenia) 3m, Anatolia 5.25m now extending into the Caucasus 0.25m, southern Crimea, North Africa 1.25m+1.75m+1m+0.5m, Mediterranean islands ?m and southern Italy ?m, Ravenna region north-east Italy ?m. [1]: (Stathakopoulos 2008, 310) Jeffreys E, Haldon J and Cormack R eds. 2008. The Oxford Handbook of Byzantine Studies. Oxford University Press. Oxford. [2]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978) McEvedy, C. Jones, R. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Allen Lane. London. |
||||||
|
People. Estimated from McEvedy and Jones "Italy" which had 3,500,000 in 600 CE and 3,750,000 in 700 CE.
[1]
Figures divided by three to roughly approximate population ruled by this polity.
Population recovery/expansion in the seventh century leading to abandoned sites to be reinhabited, new sites to be created and the countryside to be repopulated. [2] [1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 107) [2]: (Noble 1984, 8) Noble, Thomas F. X. 1984. The Republic of St. Peter. The Birth of the Papal State, 680-825. University of Pennsylvania Press. Philadelphia. |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
Whole of Japan = 1m in 300 CE, 1.5m in 400 CE, 1.75m in 500 CE, 3m in 600 CE, 3.5m in 700 CE.
[1]
or 5m in 700 CE. 16.8% in Kansai region during Yayoi and Kofun period.
[2]
Figure for 600-710 CE = estimate for southern half of Japan Centers in Kyushu (south west Japan) and Nara-Osaka-Kobe area until 600 CE when unified by a bureaucracy and Buddhism. So 250-599 CE = Nara-Osaka-Kobe, whilst 600-710 CE = Nara-Osaka-Kobe + Kyushu (south west Japan)."The other main centre was in the fertile, but circumscribed, alluvial systems of the Nara-Osaka-Kobe area, where status differentiation appears instead to have been based on hereditary ritual authority. The fusion of these geographical power-bases had occurred by about A.D. 600, by which time a well-developed bureaucracy in the Nara basin was exerting its authority and promoting Buddhism as a unifying ideology for the new regime, thus replacing the ritual authority vested in earlier individual rulers." [3] 900,000 in Japan 300 BCE - 700 CE an estimation of the population size in Japan between 300 BCE-700 CE was provided by Koyama [4] on the basis of his demographic study on the forty-seven-volume "National Site Maps" published by the Japanese government in 1965. During the Yayoi and Kofun periods around 16.8 % of Japan’s population lived in the Kansai region [5] . 5,000,000 in whole archipelago 700 CE "In the case of ritsuryo Japan, demographers combine the few surviving local census figures with scattered records of agricultural output to estimate the archipelago’s overall population as of 700 CE at about 5,000,000. For the next three centuries or so the number seems to have fluctuated in the five to six million range and then gradually risen to perhaps seven million by 1150." [2] [1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978) McEvedy, Colin. Jones, Richard. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books Ltd. London. [2]: (Totman 2004, 83) Totman, Conrad D. 2004. Pre-Industrial Korea and Japan in Environmental Perspective. BRILL. [3]: (Ikawa-Smith 1985, 396) Ikawa-Smith, Fumiko in Misra, Virenda N. Bellwood, Peter S. 1985. Recent Advances in Indo-Pacific Prehistory: Proceedings of the International Symposium Held at Poona, December 19-21, 1978. BRILL. [4]: Koyama, S., 1978. Jomon Subsistence and Population. Senri Ethnological Studies 2. Osaka: National Museum of Ethnology [5]: Kidder, J. E., 2007. Himiko and Japan’s elusive chiefdom of Yamatai: archaeology, history, and mythology. University of Hawaii Press, 60. |
||||||
|
People.
Estimates based on McEvedy and Jones (1978) [1] 500 CE: Iraq 1.1m, Iran 4.5m, Afghanistan 2.5m, Transoxania (southern part) 0.5m?, Caucasia 0.3m. 600 CE: Iran 5m, Iraq 1m, Transoxania (southern part) 1m, Afghanistan 2.5m, Yemen, Oman and Gulf Coast 2.8m, Caucasia 0.4m need to add Pakistan ?m 620 CE: Iran 5m, Afghanistan 2.5m, Iraq 1m, Caucasia 0.4m, Yemen, Oman and Gulf Coast 2.8m, Anatolia 5m, Egypt 3.0m, Palestine and Jordan 0.4m, Transoxania (part) 1m. need to add Pakistan ?m [1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978) McEvedy, Colin. Jones, Richard. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books Ltd. |
||||||
|
People.
Johannes Preiser-Kapeller 2015 [1] (since 541/542: Plague epidemic, returns all 10-15 years until ca. 750) 630: 11 Million 700: 4.5 Million 800: 5 Million (stabilisation of population after end of plague epidemics) 867: 5.5 MillionThese estimates are connected to the estimates of the territorial extent. All of these numbers are of course guesstimates, but we have to take into consideration both the effects of dramatic loss of territory and the recurrent plague epidemics until the mid-8th cent. [2] "Furthermore, there is a significant drop in the number of subsistence crises in the seventh and eighth centuries throughout the empire compared to the period before that, indicating a population that did not put pressure on the available resources(Stathakopoulos 2004: 23-34). For that we may assume that large parts of the empire were less densely populated (at 9 inhabitants per km2) with an overall estimated population of 12 million (13 million in 800—Russell 1958:149; 7 million in the 780s—Treadgold 1997: 570)." [3] "The outbreak of the so-called Justinianic Plague (541-750) represents a watershed for the demographic development of the Byzantine state. The pandemic ravaged the Mediterranean world in some eighteen waves, on average one every twelve years, causing large-scale mortality (Stathakopoulos 2004: 111-55; Conrad 1981; Little 2007)." [4] Estimates based on McEvedy and Jones (1978). [5] 700 CE Greece and Balkans extending to Italy (including Bosnia, Serbia, Croatia, Slovenia) 3m, Anatolia 5.5m, southern Crimea ?m, Mediterranean islands ?m and southern Italy ?m, Ravenna region north-east Italy ?m. 750 CE Greece and Balkans extending to Italy (including Bosnia, Serbia, Croatia, Slovenia) 3m, Anatolia 5.75m, southern Crimea ?m, Mediterranean islands (except Sardinia) ?m and southern Italy ?m, Ravenna region north-east Italy ?m. 800 CE Greece and Balkans extending to Italy (including Bosnia, Serbia, Croatia, Slovenia) 3m, Anatolia 6m, southern Crimea ?m, Mediterranean islands (except Sardinia and Corsica) ?m and southern Italy ?m. 850 CE Greece and part of Balkans 1.5m, Anatolia 6.25m, southern Crimea ?m, small part of southern Italy ?m. 19m in 500 CE; 17m in 600 CE; 7m in 700 CE; 8m in 800 CE. [6] [1]: (Johannes Preiser-Kapeller 2015) Institute for Medieval Research, Division of Byzantine Research, Austrian Academy of Sciences) [2]: (Johannes Preiser-Kapeller 2015) Institute for Medieval Research, Division of Byzantine Research, Austrian Academy of Sciences. Personal Communication) [3]: (Stathakopoulos 2008, 311) Jeffreys E, Haldon J and Cormack R eds. 2008. The Oxford Handbook of Byzantine Studies. Oxford University Press. Oxford. [4]: (Stathakopoulos 2008, 310) Jeffreys E, Haldon J and Cormack R eds. 2008. The Oxford Handbook of Byzantine Studies. Oxford University Press. Oxford. [5]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978) McEvedy, C. Jones, R. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Allen Lane. London. [6]: (Palmisano, Alessio. Personal Communication to Jill Levine, Dan Hoyer, and Peter Turchin. April 2020. Email) |
||||||
|
[1]
In the 7th Century population of Mesopotamia reached its height of about 2 million. [2] Egypt possessed from 671 CE. About 2.5m inhabitants [3] South-eastern Anatolia, Levant, western Iran may have contributed another 2.5 million. [3] [1]: (Modelski 2003, 179 ) [2]: (Stearns 2001, 28) [3]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 226) |
||||||
|
People. Estimated from McEvedy and Jones "Italy" which had 3,500,000 in 600 CE and 3,750,000 in 700 CE.
[1]
Figures divided by three to roughly approximate population ruled by this polity.
Population recovery/expansion in the seventh century leading to abandoned sites to be reinhabited, new sites to be created and the countryside to be repopulated. [2] [1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 107) [2]: (Noble 1984, 8) Noble, Thomas F. X. 1984. The Republic of St. Peter. The Birth of the Papal State, 680-825. University of Pennsylvania Press. Philadelphia. |
||||||
|
People.
Johannes Preiser-Kapeller 2015 [1] (since 541/542: Plague epidemic, returns all 10-15 years until ca. 750) 630: 11 Million 700: 4.5 Million 800: 5 Million (stabilisation of population after end of plague epidemics) 867: 5.5 MillionThese estimates are connected to the estimates of the territorial extent. All of these numbers are of course guesstimates, but we have to take into consideration both the effects of dramatic loss of territory and the recurrent plague epidemics until the mid-8th cent. [2] "Furthermore, there is a significant drop in the number of subsistence crises in the seventh and eighth centuries throughout the empire compared to the period before that, indicating a population that did not put pressure on the available resources(Stathakopoulos 2004: 23-34). For that we may assume that large parts of the empire were less densely populated (at 9 inhabitants per km2) with an overall estimated population of 12 million (13 million in 800—Russell 1958:149; 7 million in the 780s—Treadgold 1997: 570)." [3] "The outbreak of the so-called Justinianic Plague (541-750) represents a watershed for the demographic development of the Byzantine state. The pandemic ravaged the Mediterranean world in some eighteen waves, on average one every twelve years, causing large-scale mortality (Stathakopoulos 2004: 111-55; Conrad 1981; Little 2007)." [4] Estimates based on McEvedy and Jones (1978). [5] 700 CE Greece and Balkans extending to Italy (including Bosnia, Serbia, Croatia, Slovenia) 3m, Anatolia 5.5m, southern Crimea ?m, Mediterranean islands ?m and southern Italy ?m, Ravenna region north-east Italy ?m. 750 CE Greece and Balkans extending to Italy (including Bosnia, Serbia, Croatia, Slovenia) 3m, Anatolia 5.75m, southern Crimea ?m, Mediterranean islands (except Sardinia) ?m and southern Italy ?m, Ravenna region north-east Italy ?m. 800 CE Greece and Balkans extending to Italy (including Bosnia, Serbia, Croatia, Slovenia) 3m, Anatolia 6m, southern Crimea ?m, Mediterranean islands (except Sardinia and Corsica) ?m and southern Italy ?m. 850 CE Greece and part of Balkans 1.5m, Anatolia 6.25m, southern Crimea ?m, small part of southern Italy ?m. 19m in 500 CE; 17m in 600 CE; 7m in 700 CE; 8m in 800 CE. [6] [1]: (Johannes Preiser-Kapeller 2015) Institute for Medieval Research, Division of Byzantine Research, Austrian Academy of Sciences) [2]: (Johannes Preiser-Kapeller 2015) Institute for Medieval Research, Division of Byzantine Research, Austrian Academy of Sciences. Personal Communication) [3]: (Stathakopoulos 2008, 311) Jeffreys E, Haldon J and Cormack R eds. 2008. The Oxford Handbook of Byzantine Studies. Oxford University Press. Oxford. [4]: (Stathakopoulos 2008, 310) Jeffreys E, Haldon J and Cormack R eds. 2008. The Oxford Handbook of Byzantine Studies. Oxford University Press. Oxford. [5]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978) McEvedy, C. Jones, R. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Allen Lane. London. [6]: (Palmisano, Alessio. Personal Communication to Jill Levine, Dan Hoyer, and Peter Turchin. April 2020. Email) |
||||||
|
People.
|
||||||
|
People.
Census in 766 CE recorded 16.9m. "It is impossible, however, to believe, as some authors would have it, that 36 million people perished, especially in view of the fact that large parts of the country were not affected by the fighting. It is more likely these figures reveal a far-reaching disorganization of the government and its inability to have a proper census carried out. The T’ang government never recovered full control, particularly in the northern provinces ... the areas under the rule of the more independent military governors failed to follow the instructions of the central government also in this respect as they did in so many others." [1] "In this period the population of the southern provinces, e.g. Kwangtung, increased rapidly. The Cantonese still call themselves T’ang jen - men of T’ang." [1] "60-80 million in 900" [2] [1]: (Rodzinski 1979, 130) [2]: (Lorge 2015, 182) |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
[4,400,000-5,600,000]: 950 CE (using for 900 CE); [5,500,000-6,300,000]: 1150 CE (using for 1100 CE) population estimate by Farris
[1]
4,000,000: 800CE; 4,500,000: 1000CE (using [4,500,000-5,000,000] on basis more recent Farris estimates are higher, but don’t want to estimate too high i.e. linear in case there was cause for population drop/famine/warfare etc.); 5,750,000:1100CE. Population estimates from McEvedy and Jones. [2] [1]: Farris, William Wayne. 2006. Japan’s Medieval Population: Famine, Fertility, and Warfare in a Transformative Age. University of Hawaii Press.p.9 [2]: McEvedy, Colin and Richard Jones. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books. London.p.181 |
||||||
|
persons.
[23,000,000-33,000,000]: 750-799 CE ET: is this expert disagreement or a range? I’ve changed curly brackets to square brackets on the assumption it’s a range (only one source cited). [720 CE] {23,000,000-33,000,000} [1] The population of the Abbasid Caliphate would have been comparable to the preceding Umayyad Caliphate. The loss of Iberia and the Western half of North Africa in part accounted for by the ensuring population growth of the remaining territory. 900 CE - no Egypt, Afghanistan or Central Asia. Western Iran 2m (estimating half of total 4.25m), Iraq 2.5m, The Interior (Saudi Arabia) 2m, Palestine and Jordan 0.5m, Syria 1.5m. [2] Also a bit of Turkey and the Caucasus which is too tough to estimate. Will use 9 million as base of a range. [1]: Blankinship, Khalid Yahya, The End of the Jihad State pp.37-8 [2]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978) McEvedy, Colin. Jones, Richard. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books Ltd. |
||||||
|
Inhabitants.
[1]
Estimated from McEvedy and Jones "Italy" which had 4,000,000 in 800 CE and 4,500,000 in 900 CE.
[1]
Figures divided by three to roughly approximate population ruled by this polity would be 1,333,000: 800 CE; 1,500,000: 900 CE. The "Latium: Medieval Era (500-1500 CE)" coding page currently estimates the population of the Latium region only as: 265000: 650 CE; 385000: 750 CE; 440000: 800 CE; 445000: 850 CE; 440000: 867 CE; 335000: 904 CE. These estimates support the magnitude of the crude estimate based on the McEvedy and Jones figures given that this polity covered only major two city regions, Ravenna and Rome, and what was in between.
[1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 107) |
||||||
|
People.
Johannes Preiser-Kapeller 2015 [1] (since 541/542: Plague epidemic, returns all 10-15 years until ca. 750) 630: 11 Million 700: 4.5 Million 800: 5 Million (stabilisation of population after end of plague epidemics) 867: 5.5 MillionThese estimates are connected to the estimates of the territorial extent. All of these numbers are of course guesstimates, but we have to take into consideration both the effects of dramatic loss of territory and the recurrent plague epidemics until the mid-8th cent. [2] "Furthermore, there is a significant drop in the number of subsistence crises in the seventh and eighth centuries throughout the empire compared to the period before that, indicating a population that did not put pressure on the available resources(Stathakopoulos 2004: 23-34). For that we may assume that large parts of the empire were less densely populated (at 9 inhabitants per km2) with an overall estimated population of 12 million (13 million in 800—Russell 1958:149; 7 million in the 780s—Treadgold 1997: 570)." [3] "The outbreak of the so-called Justinianic Plague (541-750) represents a watershed for the demographic development of the Byzantine state. The pandemic ravaged the Mediterranean world in some eighteen waves, on average one every twelve years, causing large-scale mortality (Stathakopoulos 2004: 111-55; Conrad 1981; Little 2007)." [4] Estimates based on McEvedy and Jones (1978). [5] 700 CE Greece and Balkans extending to Italy (including Bosnia, Serbia, Croatia, Slovenia) 3m, Anatolia 5.5m, southern Crimea ?m, Mediterranean islands ?m and southern Italy ?m, Ravenna region north-east Italy ?m. 750 CE Greece and Balkans extending to Italy (including Bosnia, Serbia, Croatia, Slovenia) 3m, Anatolia 5.75m, southern Crimea ?m, Mediterranean islands (except Sardinia) ?m and southern Italy ?m, Ravenna region north-east Italy ?m. 800 CE Greece and Balkans extending to Italy (including Bosnia, Serbia, Croatia, Slovenia) 3m, Anatolia 6m, southern Crimea ?m, Mediterranean islands (except Sardinia and Corsica) ?m and southern Italy ?m. 850 CE Greece and part of Balkans 1.5m, Anatolia 6.25m, southern Crimea ?m, small part of southern Italy ?m. 19m in 500 CE; 17m in 600 CE; 7m in 700 CE; 8m in 800 CE. [6] [1]: (Johannes Preiser-Kapeller 2015) Institute for Medieval Research, Division of Byzantine Research, Austrian Academy of Sciences) [2]: (Johannes Preiser-Kapeller 2015) Institute for Medieval Research, Division of Byzantine Research, Austrian Academy of Sciences. Personal Communication) [3]: (Stathakopoulos 2008, 311) Jeffreys E, Haldon J and Cormack R eds. 2008. The Oxford Handbook of Byzantine Studies. Oxford University Press. Oxford. [4]: (Stathakopoulos 2008, 310) Jeffreys E, Haldon J and Cormack R eds. 2008. The Oxford Handbook of Byzantine Studies. Oxford University Press. Oxford. [5]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978) McEvedy, C. Jones, R. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Allen Lane. London. [6]: (Palmisano, Alessio. Personal Communication to Jill Levine, Dan Hoyer, and Peter Turchin. April 2020. Email) |
||||||
|
The Gaul part of the kingdom counted around 811 CE 5,000,000 inhabitants.
|
||||||
|
The Gaul part of the kingdom counted around 811 CE 5,000,000 inhabitants.
|
||||||
|
5 million in Gaul during reign of Charlemagne.
[1]
Territory also included Rhineland in modern Germany, which became East Francia from 844 CE, in northern Italy (until 856 CE) and the low countries. Estimates for these regions based on McEvedy and Jones (1978). Germany about 1 million, low countries about 1 million, Italy 2 million. [2] Period from 900 CE loses territory in modern Germany and low countries. [1]: (Percy Jr 1995, 1415-1417) [2]: (McEverdy and Jones 1978, 67) |
||||||
|
5 million in Gaul during reign of Charlemagne.
[1]
Territory also included Rhineland in modern Germany, which became East Francia from 844 CE, in northern Italy (until 856 CE) and the low countries. Estimates for these regions based on McEvedy and Jones (1978). Germany about 1 million, low countries about 1 million, Italy 2 million. [2] Period from 900 CE loses territory in modern Germany and low countries. [1]: (Percy Jr 1995, 1415-1417) [2]: (McEverdy and Jones 1978, 67) |
||||||
|
Inhabitants.
[1]
Estimated from McEvedy and Jones "Italy" which had 4,000,000 in 800 CE and 4,500,000 in 900 CE.
[1]
Figures divided by three to roughly approximate population ruled by this polity would be 1,333,000: 800 CE; 1,500,000: 900 CE. The "Latium: Medieval Era (500-1500 CE)" coding page currently estimates the population of the Latium region only as: 265000: 650 CE; 385000: 750 CE; 440000: 800 CE; 445000: 850 CE; 440000: 867 CE; 335000: 904 CE. These estimates support the magnitude of the crude estimate based on the McEvedy and Jones figures given that this polity covered only major two city regions, Ravenna and Rome, and what was in between.
[1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 107) |
||||||
|
People.
Census in 766 CE recorded 16.9m. "It is impossible, however, to believe, as some authors would have it, that 36 million people perished, especially in view of the fact that large parts of the country were not affected by the fighting. It is more likely these figures reveal a far-reaching disorganization of the government and its inability to have a proper census carried out. The T’ang government never recovered full control, particularly in the northern provinces ... the areas under the rule of the more independent military governors failed to follow the instructions of the central government also in this respect as they did in so many others." [1] "In this period the population of the southern provinces, e.g. Kwangtung, increased rapidly. The Cantonese still call themselves T’ang jen - men of T’ang." [1] "60-80 million in 900" [2] [1]: (Rodzinski 1979, 130) [2]: (Lorge 2015, 182) |
||||||
|
[4,400,000-5,600,000]: 950 CE (using for 900 CE); [5,500,000-6,300,000]: 1150 CE (using for 1100 CE) population estimate by Farris
[1]
4,000,000: 800CE; 4,500,000: 1000CE (using [4,500,000-5,000,000] on basis more recent Farris estimates are higher, but don’t want to estimate too high i.e. linear in case there was cause for population drop/famine/warfare etc.); 5,750,000:1100CE. Population estimates from McEvedy and Jones. [2] [1]: Farris, William Wayne. 2006. Japan’s Medieval Population: Famine, Fertility, and Warfare in a Transformative Age. University of Hawaii Press.p.9 [2]: McEvedy, Colin and Richard Jones. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books. London.p.181 |
||||||
|
People.
Preiser-Kapeller [1] "My estimates may be more conservative than others." [2] 5,500,000: 867 CE 7,300,00: 900 CE 10,000,000: 1000 CE 13,000,000: 1050 CE 12,000,000: 1025 CE. [3] "Between 850 and 1000 there is evidence for the regression of woodland in favour of arable land, an indication of a growing population (Dunn 1992: 242-8; Lefort 2002: 269)." [4] "... around 1025, although the empire occupied more or less the same amount of territory as in 750, it was more densely populated (at c.20 inhabitants per km2) and all in all more populous at roughly 18 million (between 10 and 18 million—Koder 1984/2001: 153; 19 million around 1025—Laiou 2002: 50-1; 18 million around 1050—Stein 1949-51:154)." [4] Estimates based on McEvedy and Jones (1978). [5] 900 CE Greece 1m, Anatolia 6.5m, southern Crimea ?m, small part of southern Italy m?. 950 CE Small part of Greece 0.5m and southern Italy ?m, Anatolia 6.75m, southern Crimea ?m. 1000 CE Greece 1m, Anatolia 7m, small part of southern Italy ?m. 1050 CE Greece and Balkans 2m, Anatolia 7m, small part of southern Italy ?m. According to Stein, Byzantine Empire (1951) Mid-11th Century time of Comneni: 10-12m. [6] [1]: (Preiser-Kapeller 2015) Institute for Medieval Research, Division of Byzantine Research, Austrian Academy of Sciences) [2]: (Preiser-Kapeller 2015) Institute for Medieval Research, Division of Byzantine Research, Austrian Academy of Sciences. Personal Communication. [3]: (Treadgold 1997, 570) Treadgold, Warren. 1997. A History of the Byzantine State and Society. Stanford University Press. Stanford. [4]: (Stathakopoulos 2008, 312) Jeffreys E, Haldon J and Cormack R eds. 2008. The Oxford Handbook of Byzantine Studies. Oxford University Press. Oxford. [5]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978) McEvedy, C. Jones, R. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Allen Lane. London. [6]: (Russell 1958) Russell, J C (1958) Late and Medieval Population. Transactions of the American Philosophical Society. New Series. Vol 48. No 3. pp. 1-152 citing Stein, E. 1949-1951. Introduction a l’histoire et aux institutions byzantines, Traditio 7: 154 |
||||||
|
persons.
[23,000,000-33,000,000]: 750-799 CE ET: is this expert disagreement or a range? I’ve changed curly brackets to square brackets on the assumption it’s a range (only one source cited). [720 CE] {23,000,000-33,000,000} [1] The population of the Abbasid Caliphate would have been comparable to the preceding Umayyad Caliphate. The loss of Iberia and the Western half of North Africa in part accounted for by the ensuring population growth of the remaining territory. 900 CE - no Egypt, Afghanistan or Central Asia. Western Iran 2m (estimating half of total 4.25m), Iraq 2.5m, The Interior (Saudi Arabia) 2m, Palestine and Jordan 0.5m, Syria 1.5m. [2] Also a bit of Turkey and the Caucasus which is too tough to estimate. Will use 9 million as base of a range. [1]: Blankinship, Khalid Yahya, The End of the Jihad State pp.37-8 [2]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978) McEvedy, Colin. Jones, Richard. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books Ltd. |
||||||
|
5 million in Gaul during reign of Charlemagne.
[1]
Territory also included Rhineland in modern Germany, which became East Francia from 844 CE, in northern Italy (until 856 CE) and the low countries. Estimates for these regions based on McEvedy and Jones (1978). Germany about 1 million, low countries about 1 million, Italy 2 million. [2] Period from 900 CE loses territory in modern Germany and low countries. [1]: (Percy Jr 1995, 1415-1417) [2]: (McEverdy and Jones 1978, 67) |
||||||
|
’Hard demographic data are extremely difficult to find. Most scholars estimate the population around 930 CE between 5.000 and 20.000, with 10.000 as the consensus figure. The population in 1262 CE is estimated to be between 50.000 and 60.000. Population estimates are usually based on data on tax paying farmers. These data allow us to establish a minimum population. Around 1100 CE there were approximately 4500 tax-paying farmers and this number is usually multiplied by seven (the number of persons per household) to arrive at the estimate for the overall population.’
[1]
Estimates given in the literature vary: ’Historical sources set the beginning of Norse settlement in Iceland at approximately 870 A.D., a date that is generally collaborated by the archaeological evidence. There was no prior inhabitation with the exception of a few Irish monks who may have periodically visited the island beginning in the eighth century. The relative proportion of Norse (primarily Norwegian) and Celtic (from the northern British Isles) contributions to the original Icelandic population has been debated. Recent DNA analyses of the modern population indicate that the relative contributions are dramatically skewed by gender with the majority of females deriving from Celtic origins whereas the males appear to have been predominately Norse. Estimates of total population based on a survey of independent farmers conducted around the year 1100 indicate roughly 60,000 - 70,000 individuals.’
[2]
’According to the Statistical Abstract of Iceland (1984:64-69), in 1900, before land reclamation began, there were 98,398 hectares of pasture land (homefields, not common pasture lands) in Iceland. Tomasson (1980:60) cites evidence that the area of vegetation in Iceland has decreased by half since the period of settlement. The point is that there may have been as much as about a hundred thousand hectares of land suitable for homefield pastures, [Page 253] sufficient to support a hundred thousand individuals as members of independent households, according to Commonwealth criteria. Whatever their bases for calculation, only one population estimate exceeds 100,000 and most are much lower for the entire period (Tomasson 1980:58). There must have been sufficient land for the population. Any shortage of land was due to social, not ecological factors. In addition to animal husbandry, the rich resources of fish, marine mammals, and birds have been of economic importance from the time of settlement to the present.’
[3]
But generally, low population densities and dispersed settlement patterns are assumed: ’Because agriculture was the chief economic activity, the population of Iceland was evenly distributed throughout the inhabitable parts of the country until the end of the 19th century.’
[4]
’The requirements of livestock herding insured that Icelandic land-use was characterized by low population densities, a dispersed settlement pattern, and large farmsteads. Within such farmsteads land was divided into spatial units reflecting different levels of management associated with homefields, hay-producing areas, and outer pastures. Outbuildings associated with the seasonal components of Icelandic transhumant pastoralism were scattered throughout these various land-use areas and in the upland heaths surrounding zones of intensive occupation (Bredahl-Petersen 1967; Hastrup 1985).’
[5]
[1]: Árni Daniel Júlíusson and Axel Kristissen 2017, pers. comm. to E. Brandl and D. Mullins [2]: Bolender, Douglas James and Beierle, John: eHRAF Cultural Summary for Early Icelanders [3]: Durrenberger, E. Paul 1988. “Stratification Without A State: The Collapse Of The Icelandic Commonwealth”, 252 [4]: http://www.britannica.com/place/Iceland [5]: Smith, Kevin P., and Jeffrey R. Parsons 1989. “Regional Archaeological Research In Iceland: Potentials And Possibilities”, 181 |
||||||
|
[4,400,000-5,600,000]: 950 CE (using for 900 CE); [5,500,000-6,300,000]: 1150 CE (using for 1100 CE) population estimate by Farris
[1]
4,000,000: 800CE; 4,500,000: 1000CE (using [4,500,000-5,000,000] on basis more recent Farris estimates are higher, but don’t want to estimate too high i.e. linear in case there was cause for population drop/famine/warfare etc.); 5,750,000:1100CE. Population estimates from McEvedy and Jones. [2] [1]: Farris, William Wayne. 2006. Japan’s Medieval Population: Famine, Fertility, and Warfare in a Transformative Age. University of Hawaii Press.p.9 [2]: McEvedy, Colin and Richard Jones. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books. London.p.181 |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
People.
1000 CE Algeria 2m, Tunisia 1m, Libya 0.5m, Egypt 5m, Palestine and Jordan 0.5m, Hijaz 4m (est. from 4.5m for The Interior). [1] 1100 CE Egypt 4m and eastern Libya 0.2m (est. from 0.4m) [1] 1056 CE low Nile flood severe famine which took "a heavy toll in human life and disrupted collection of state revenues." [2] [1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978) McEvedy, Colin. Jones, Richard. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books Ltd. London. [2]: (Lev 1987, 348-349) |
||||||
|
Inhabitants.
ET: [1] Estimated from McEvedy and Jones "Italy" which had 5,000,000 in 1000 CE and 5,750,000 in 1100 CE. [1] Figures divided by three to roughly approximate population ruled by this polity would be 1,666,000: 1000 CE; 1,916,000: 1100 CE. The "Latium: Medieval Era (500-1500 CE)" coding page currently estimates the population of the Latium region only as: 335000: 904 CE; 110000: 1422 CE. These estimates for Latium conflict with the crude estimates based on the McEvedy and Jones figures for the whole of Italy since the latter do not drop from 850-1450 CE, they rise. Therefore I will assume the increase in population occurred outside of the region of this polity (Milan, Venice, Florence, Genoa?) and within this polity the population dropped, the initial McEverdy and Jones totals divided by 4 and 5 respectively.The population of the modern administrative region of Lazio currently stands at around 5,557,2756. This follows the massive improvement of living conditions after World War II. [2] I second the opinion expressed in the "Population" sub-section, however: there is virtually no information in the scholarship (English, French, even Italian) on the demographics of Lazio as a whole for the medieval period. Karl Julius Beloch’s Storia della Popolazione d’Italia (1937-1961; Italian trans. 1994) remains the best account of Italian demographic patterns, but the section on the Papal States does not begin until around 1500. [1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 107) [2]: http://demo.istat.it/bilmens2012gen/index.html |
||||||
|
People.
ET: By 200 BC 30 million on the Indian Subcontinent, 20 million (40%) in Ganges basin. "The next fifteen hundred years consolidated without significantly altering this pattern." [1] McEvedy and Jones estimated for Pakistan, India and Bangladesh 77m for 1000 CE, 80m for 1100 CE. If the proportion within the Ganges basin remained the same (40%) that leaves for the rest of the Indian Subcontinent: 46.2m for 1000 CE, 48 for 1100 CE. Pakistan contains the Indus valley which presumably also was densely populated. If we assume the fertile Indus valley contained the majority (50% population?) of the remaining population, whilst respecting the claim that "the demographic centre of the country" was the Gangetic provinces (so Indus probably does not hold much more than 50% of the non-Gangetic population) that leaves for the remaining areas: 23.1m for 1000 CE, 24m for 1100 CE. The remaining area left covers 2,000,000 km2 and the polity of about 650,000 KM2 covered about 33% of this area. So, assuming an even distribution of population across the remaining landmass, a population magnitude estimate would be: 7.6m for 1000 CE, 7.9m for 1100 CE. According to maps of 800-900 CE [2] there were about 6-7 other polities in the remaining region during the same time period. [1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 182-185) McEvedy, Colin. Jones, Richard. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books Ltd. London. [2]: geacron.com |
||||||
|
People.
"Russian Turkestan" is a reasonable approximation of the territory held by the Kara-Khanids in 1000 CE, particularly with respect to the urban areas. Estimate 2.5 million for 1000 CE. The Kara-Khanids held slightly less territory in 1200 CE, however since McEvedy and Jones considered the overall population of the region was rising have kept the estimate almost the same for 1200 CE (perhaps minus population for lost territory in Khwarazm region). [1] [1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978) McEvedy, Colin. Jones, Richard. 1987. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books Ltd. London. |
||||||
|
People.
Preiser-Kapeller [1] "My estimates may be more conservative than others." [2] 5,500,000: 867 CE 7,300,00: 900 CE 10,000,000: 1000 CE 13,000,000: 1050 CE 12,000,000: 1025 CE. [3] "Between 850 and 1000 there is evidence for the regression of woodland in favour of arable land, an indication of a growing population (Dunn 1992: 242-8; Lefort 2002: 269)." [4] "... around 1025, although the empire occupied more or less the same amount of territory as in 750, it was more densely populated (at c.20 inhabitants per km2) and all in all more populous at roughly 18 million (between 10 and 18 million—Koder 1984/2001: 153; 19 million around 1025—Laiou 2002: 50-1; 18 million around 1050—Stein 1949-51:154)." [4] Estimates based on McEvedy and Jones (1978). [5] 900 CE Greece 1m, Anatolia 6.5m, southern Crimea ?m, small part of southern Italy m?. 950 CE Small part of Greece 0.5m and southern Italy ?m, Anatolia 6.75m, southern Crimea ?m. 1000 CE Greece 1m, Anatolia 7m, small part of southern Italy ?m. 1050 CE Greece and Balkans 2m, Anatolia 7m, small part of southern Italy ?m. According to Stein, Byzantine Empire (1951) Mid-11th Century time of Comneni: 10-12m. [6] [1]: (Preiser-Kapeller 2015) Institute for Medieval Research, Division of Byzantine Research, Austrian Academy of Sciences) [2]: (Preiser-Kapeller 2015) Institute for Medieval Research, Division of Byzantine Research, Austrian Academy of Sciences. Personal Communication. [3]: (Treadgold 1997, 570) Treadgold, Warren. 1997. A History of the Byzantine State and Society. Stanford University Press. Stanford. [4]: (Stathakopoulos 2008, 312) Jeffreys E, Haldon J and Cormack R eds. 2008. The Oxford Handbook of Byzantine Studies. Oxford University Press. Oxford. [5]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978) McEvedy, C. Jones, R. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Allen Lane. London. [6]: (Russell 1958) Russell, J C (1958) Late and Medieval Population. Transactions of the American Philosophical Society. New Series. Vol 48. No 3. pp. 1-152 citing Stein, E. 1949-1951. Introduction a l’histoire et aux institutions byzantines, Traditio 7: 154 |
||||||
|
People. Typical population for one of the Tairona polities, estimated from the Upper Buritaca region: "CIUDAD PERDIDA region. Wilson estimated the population at 7200 but using an arbitrary number of inhabitants by ha. Castaño estimated it at 3000 inhabitants. Rodriguez: between 1400-3000. Rodriguez and Botero: Alto Buritaca and Nulicuandecue would have had 8000 people at 66 people per ha, and Ciudad Perdida 1716 inhabitants. Serje estimated 1500 people."
[1]
[360,000-500,000] is an estimate for the NGA in total. "Though there are no reliable population estimates for the area, Spanish documents dating from the 16th century constantly mention that it was very densely populated. Projections made on very rough population numbers calculated by the Spanish authorities around 1593 suggest that at the time of contact with Europeans, at least 250,000 people inhabited the northern and western portions of the Sierra Nevada. Dever’s (2007: 207) more recent calculations estimate population densities to be around 120 people per km2, which give us a total of 360,000 persons for an area of approximately 3000 km2. Less conservative estimates place the number at around 500,000 (Restrepo 1953). Given the fact that new sites continue to be found on a yearly basis or become visible as large swaths of forest in the Sierra Nevada are cut down for ranching and cultivation, it is quite possible that even these less conservative figures may be a low estimate." [2] Information from Langebaek 2005 [1] : THREE LARGEST BAYS. Murdy estimated the population for the three largest bays: 165 in Concha, 150-200 in Neguanje and 150-200 in Cinto. Including Guachiquita, Palmarito ad Taganga, that’s 650-800 inhabitants for the zone. PUEBLITO. Reichel-Dolmatoff and Groot estimate the number of dwellings of Pueblito at about 1000. Murdy estimates the number of dwellings at 500-1000 and the population between 3000 and 5000 inhabitants. Engel had estimated the number of inhabitants at 1000. Wynn estimated a population ranging between 4500 and 5000. CIUDAD PERDIDA. Wilson estimated the population at 7200 but using an arbitrary number of inhabitants by ha. Castaño estimated it at 3000 inhabitants. Rodriguez: between 1400-3000. Rodriguez and Botero: Alto Buritaca and Nulicuandecue would have had 8000 people at 66 people per ha, and Ciudad Perdida 1716 inhabitants. Serje estimated 1500 people. BAY OF GAIRACA. Lleras estimates the population at 350-500 people using data from water wells. Adding the lowest figures, the estimate in total comes to about 3500 inhabitants. Adding the highest figures, it comes to about 14,300. Study of the Santa Marta Bays, a survey area of 90.78 square km: "The population dynamics may be compared in absolute terms, although this is always a risky exercise. If a density of 5 to 10 persons per occupied hectare (Sanders, Parsons and Santley 1979:34-40) were assumed, then there would be between 90 and 179 persons for the Neguanje Period; between 95 and 190 for the Buritaca Period; between 1087 and 2174 for the Late Period; and only between 30 and 59 for the period after the Spanish invasion." [3] Study of the Santa Marta Bays, a survey area of 90.78 square km: "The population dynamics may be compared in absolute terms, although this is always a risky exercise. If a density of 5 to 10 persons per occupied hectare (Sanders, Parsons and Santley 1979:34-40) were assumed, then there would be between 90 and 179 persons for the Neguanje Period; between 95 and 190 for the Buritaca Period; between 1087 and 2174 for the Late Period; and only between 30 and 59 for the period after the Spanish invasion." [3] This is an estimate for one of the polities, supposedly centered on the Santa Marta Bays between the 10th and 16th centuries. Because there is better resolution for the later Tairona polities, the code here will be applied to the 10th-14th century only. [1]: (Langebaek 2005, 25-7) [2]: (Giraldo 2010, 57-58) [3]: (Langebaek 2005, 91) |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
Inhabitants.
ET: [1] Estimated from McEvedy and Jones "Italy" which had 5,000,000 in 1000 CE and 5,750,000 in 1100 CE. [1] Figures divided by three to roughly approximate population ruled by this polity would be 1,666,000: 1000 CE; 1,916,000: 1100 CE. The "Latium: Medieval Era (500-1500 CE)" coding page currently estimates the population of the Latium region only as: 335000: 904 CE; 110000: 1422 CE. These estimates for Latium conflict with the crude estimates based on the McEvedy and Jones figures for the whole of Italy since the latter do not drop from 850-1450 CE, they rise. Therefore I will assume the increase in population occurred outside of the region of this polity (Milan, Venice, Florence, Genoa?) and within this polity the population dropped, the initial McEverdy and Jones totals divided by 4 and 5 respectively.The population of the modern administrative region of Lazio currently stands at around 5,557,2756. This follows the massive improvement of living conditions after World War II. [2] I second the opinion expressed in the "Population" sub-section, however: there is virtually no information in the scholarship (English, French, even Italian) on the demographics of Lazio as a whole for the medieval period. Karl Julius Beloch’s Storia della Popolazione d’Italia (1937-1961; Italian trans. 1994) remains the best account of Italian demographic patterns, but the section on the Papal States does not begin until around 1500. [1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 107) [2]: http://demo.istat.it/bilmens2012gen/index.html |
||||||
|
’Hard demographic data are extremely difficult to find. Most scholars estimate the population around 930 CE between 5.000 and 20.000, with 10.000 as the consensus figure. The population in 1262 CE is estimated to be between 50.000 and 60.000. Population estimates are usually based on data on tax paying farmers. These data allow us to establish a minimum population. Around 1100 CE there were approximately 4500 tax-paying farmers and this number is usually multiplied by seven (the number of persons per household) to arrive at the estimate for the overall population.’
[1]
Estimates given in the literature vary: ’Historical sources set the beginning of Norse settlement in Iceland at approximately 870 A.D., a date that is generally collaborated by the archaeological evidence. There was no prior inhabitation with the exception of a few Irish monks who may have periodically visited the island beginning in the eighth century. The relative proportion of Norse (primarily Norwegian) and Celtic (from the northern British Isles) contributions to the original Icelandic population has been debated. Recent DNA analyses of the modern population indicate that the relative contributions are dramatically skewed by gender with the majority of females deriving from Celtic origins whereas the males appear to have been predominately Norse. Estimates of total population based on a survey of independent farmers conducted around the year 1100 indicate roughly 60,000 - 70,000 individuals.’
[2]
’According to the Statistical Abstract of Iceland (1984:64-69), in 1900, before land reclamation began, there were 98,398 hectares of pasture land (homefields, not common pasture lands) in Iceland. Tomasson (1980:60) cites evidence that the area of vegetation in Iceland has decreased by half since the period of settlement. The point is that there may have been as much as about a hundred thousand hectares of land suitable for homefield pastures, [Page 253] sufficient to support a hundred thousand individuals as members of independent households, according to Commonwealth criteria. Whatever their bases for calculation, only one population estimate exceeds 100,000 and most are much lower for the entire period (Tomasson 1980:58). There must have been sufficient land for the population. Any shortage of land was due to social, not ecological factors. In addition to animal husbandry, the rich resources of fish, marine mammals, and birds have been of economic importance from the time of settlement to the present.’
[3]
But generally, low population densities and dispersed settlement patterns are assumed: ’Because agriculture was the chief economic activity, the population of Iceland was evenly distributed throughout the inhabitable parts of the country until the end of the 19th century.’
[4]
’The requirements of livestock herding insured that Icelandic land-use was characterized by low population densities, a dispersed settlement pattern, and large farmsteads. Within such farmsteads land was divided into spatial units reflecting different levels of management associated with homefields, hay-producing areas, and outer pastures. Outbuildings associated with the seasonal components of Icelandic transhumant pastoralism were scattered throughout these various land-use areas and in the upland heaths surrounding zones of intensive occupation (Bredahl-Petersen 1967; Hastrup 1985).’
[5]
[1]: Árni Daniel Júlíusson and Axel Kristissen 2017, pers. comm. to E. Brandl and D. Mullins [2]: Bolender, Douglas James and Beierle, John: eHRAF Cultural Summary for Early Icelanders [3]: Durrenberger, E. Paul 1988. “Stratification Without A State: The Collapse Of The Icelandic Commonwealth”, 252 [4]: http://www.britannica.com/place/Iceland [5]: Smith, Kevin P., and Jeffrey R. Parsons 1989. “Regional Archaeological Research In Iceland: Potentials And Possibilities”, 181 |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
People.
Preiser-Kapeller [1] 6,000,000: 1090 CE 10,000,000: 1150 CE 7,300,000: 1200 CE "... around 1025, although the empire occupied more or less the same amount of territory as in 750, it was more densely populated (at c.20 inhabitants per km2) and all in all more populous at roughly 18 million (between 10 and 18 million—Koder 1984/2001: 153; 19 million around 1025—Laiou 2002: 50-1; 18 million around 1050—Stein 1949-51:154)." [2] "5m in 1100 CE; 9m in 1200 CE; 2 m in 1300 CE." [3] Estimates based on McEvedy and Jones (1978). [4] 1100 CE Greece and Balkans 2m, coastal regions of Anatolia 3.5m?. 1150 CE Greece and Balkans 2m, coastal regions of Anatolia 3.5m?. 1200 CE Greece and Balkans 2m, coastal regions of Anatolia 3.5m?. According to Stein, Byzantine Empire (1951) Mid-11th Century time of Michael VIII: 5m. [5] [1]: (Preiser-Kapeller 2015) Institute for Medieval Research, Division of Byzantine Research, Austrian Academy of Sciences) [2]: (Stathakopoulos 2008, 312) Jeffreys E, Haldon J and Cormack R eds. 2008. The Oxford Handbook of Byzantine Studies. Oxford University Press. Oxford. [3]: (Palmisano, Alessio. Personal Communication to Jill Levine, Dan Hoyer, and Peter Turchin. April 2020. Email) [4]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978) McEvedy, C. Jones, R. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Allen Lane. London. [5]: (Russell 1958) Russell, J C (1958) Late and Medieval Population. Transactions of the American Philosophical Society. New Series. Vol 48. No 3. pp. 1-152 citing Stein, E. 1949-1951. Introduction a l’histoire et aux institutions byzantines, Traditio 7: 154 |
||||||
|
[4,400,000-5,600,000]: 950 CE (using for 900 CE); [5,500,000-6,300,000]: 1150 CE (using for 1100 CE) population estimate by Farris
[1]
4,000,000: 800CE; 4,500,000: 1000CE (using [4,500,000-5,000,000] on basis more recent Farris estimates are higher, but don’t want to estimate too high i.e. linear in case there was cause for population drop/famine/warfare etc.); 5,750,000:1100CE. Population estimates from McEvedy and Jones. [2] [1]: Farris, William Wayne. 2006. Japan’s Medieval Population: Famine, Fertility, and Warfare in a Transformative Age. University of Hawaii Press.p.9 [2]: McEvedy, Colin and Richard Jones. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books. London.p.181 |
||||||
|
People.
1000 CE Algeria 2m, Tunisia 1m, Libya 0.5m, Egypt 5m, Palestine and Jordan 0.5m, Hijaz 4m (est. from 4.5m for The Interior). [1] 1100 CE Egypt 4m and eastern Libya 0.2m (est. from 0.4m) [1] 1056 CE low Nile flood severe famine which took "a heavy toll in human life and disrupted collection of state revenues." [2] [1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978) McEvedy, Colin. Jones, Richard. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books Ltd. London. [2]: (Lev 1987, 348-349) |
||||||
|
People.
ET: By 200 BC 30 million on the Indian Subcontinent, 20 million (40%) in Ganges basin. "The next fifteen hundred years consolidated without significantly altering this pattern." [1] McEvedy and Jones estimated for Pakistan, India and Bangladesh 77m for 1000 CE, 80m for 1100 CE. If the proportion within the Ganges basin remained the same (40%) that leaves for the rest of the Indian Subcontinent: 46.2m for 1000 CE, 48 for 1100 CE. Pakistan contains the Indus valley which presumably also was densely populated. If we assume the fertile Indus valley contained the majority (50% population?) of the remaining population, whilst respecting the claim that "the demographic centre of the country" was the Gangetic provinces (so Indus probably does not hold much more than 50% of the non-Gangetic population) that leaves for the remaining areas: 23.1m for 1000 CE, 24m for 1100 CE. The remaining area left covers 2,000,000 km2 and the polity of about 650,000 KM2 covered about 33% of this area. So, assuming an even distribution of population across the remaining landmass, a population magnitude estimate would be: 7.6m for 1000 CE, 7.9m for 1100 CE. According to maps of 800-900 CE [2] there were about 6-7 other polities in the remaining region during the same time period. [1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 182-185) McEvedy, Colin. Jones, Richard. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books Ltd. London. [2]: geacron.com |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
People.
Estimates for Indonesia (less West New Guinea): 4.0m in 1100 CE. 4.5m in 1200 CE [1] Total area of Indonesia (less West New Guinea) 1,500,000 km2. [1] On the basis of territorial extent, Kediri, which was 50,000-70,000 km2 may have had 3-5% of the Indonesian population. 200,000 in 1100 CE, 225,000 in 120,000 CE. Will use these figures for the bottom end of a range that assumes this well-organized polity was more density populated than surrounding regions. [1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 196-201) McEvedy, Colin. Jones, Richard. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books Ltd. London. |
||||||
|
People.
Preiser-Kapeller [1] 6,000,000: 1090 CE 10,000,000: 1150 CE 7,300,000: 1200 CE "... around 1025, although the empire occupied more or less the same amount of territory as in 750, it was more densely populated (at c.20 inhabitants per km2) and all in all more populous at roughly 18 million (between 10 and 18 million—Koder 1984/2001: 153; 19 million around 1025—Laiou 2002: 50-1; 18 million around 1050—Stein 1949-51:154)." [2] "5m in 1100 CE; 9m in 1200 CE; 2 m in 1300 CE." [3] Estimates based on McEvedy and Jones (1978). [4] 1100 CE Greece and Balkans 2m, coastal regions of Anatolia 3.5m?. 1150 CE Greece and Balkans 2m, coastal regions of Anatolia 3.5m?. 1200 CE Greece and Balkans 2m, coastal regions of Anatolia 3.5m?. According to Stein, Byzantine Empire (1951) Mid-11th Century time of Michael VIII: 5m. [5] [1]: (Preiser-Kapeller 2015) Institute for Medieval Research, Division of Byzantine Research, Austrian Academy of Sciences) [2]: (Stathakopoulos 2008, 312) Jeffreys E, Haldon J and Cormack R eds. 2008. The Oxford Handbook of Byzantine Studies. Oxford University Press. Oxford. [3]: (Palmisano, Alessio. Personal Communication to Jill Levine, Dan Hoyer, and Peter Turchin. April 2020. Email) [4]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978) McEvedy, C. Jones, R. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Allen Lane. London. [5]: (Russell 1958) Russell, J C (1958) Late and Medieval Population. Transactions of the American Philosophical Society. New Series. Vol 48. No 3. pp. 1-152 citing Stein, E. 1949-1951. Introduction a l’histoire et aux institutions byzantines, Traditio 7: 154 |
||||||
|
People.
Preiser-Kapeller [1] 6,000,000: 1090 CE 10,000,000: 1150 CE 7,300,000: 1200 CE "... around 1025, although the empire occupied more or less the same amount of territory as in 750, it was more densely populated (at c.20 inhabitants per km2) and all in all more populous at roughly 18 million (between 10 and 18 million—Koder 1984/2001: 153; 19 million around 1025—Laiou 2002: 50-1; 18 million around 1050—Stein 1949-51:154)." [2] "5m in 1100 CE; 9m in 1200 CE; 2 m in 1300 CE." [3] Estimates based on McEvedy and Jones (1978). [4] 1100 CE Greece and Balkans 2m, coastal regions of Anatolia 3.5m?. 1150 CE Greece and Balkans 2m, coastal regions of Anatolia 3.5m?. 1200 CE Greece and Balkans 2m, coastal regions of Anatolia 3.5m?. According to Stein, Byzantine Empire (1951) Mid-11th Century time of Michael VIII: 5m. [5] [1]: (Preiser-Kapeller 2015) Institute for Medieval Research, Division of Byzantine Research, Austrian Academy of Sciences) [2]: (Stathakopoulos 2008, 312) Jeffreys E, Haldon J and Cormack R eds. 2008. The Oxford Handbook of Byzantine Studies. Oxford University Press. Oxford. [3]: (Palmisano, Alessio. Personal Communication to Jill Levine, Dan Hoyer, and Peter Turchin. April 2020. Email) [4]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978) McEvedy, C. Jones, R. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Allen Lane. London. [5]: (Russell 1958) Russell, J C (1958) Late and Medieval Population. Transactions of the American Philosophical Society. New Series. Vol 48. No 3. pp. 1-152 citing Stein, E. 1949-1951. Introduction a l’histoire et aux institutions byzantines, Traditio 7: 154 |
||||||
|
Population of France and estimate for French Kingdom
1150 CE - 7 million3 million 1200 CE - 10 million4 million 1250 CE - 15 million14 million 1300 CE - 18 million17 million Population of medieval France derived from Turchin and Nefedov (2009). [1] Estimates take account of territory of France in the possession of the French Kingdom. [1] Reduction of forest cover in medieval France (estimates) [2] 1000 CE: 26 million ha forest cover 1300 CE: 13 million ha forest cover [1]: (Turchin and Nefedov 2009, 113) [2]: (Turchin and Nefedov 2009, 115) |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
’Hard demographic data are extremely difficult to find. Most scholars estimate the population around 930 CE between 5.000 and 20.000, with 10.000 as the consensus figure. The population in 1262 CE is estimated to be between 50.000 and 60.000. Population estimates are usually based on data on tax paying farmers. These data allow us to establish a minimum population. Around 1100 CE there were approximately 4500 tax-paying farmers and this number is usually multiplied by seven (the number of persons per household) to arrive at the estimate for the overall population.’
[1]
Estimates given in the literature vary: ’Historical sources set the beginning of Norse settlement in Iceland at approximately 870 A.D., a date that is generally collaborated by the archaeological evidence. There was no prior inhabitation with the exception of a few Irish monks who may have periodically visited the island beginning in the eighth century. The relative proportion of Norse (primarily Norwegian) and Celtic (from the northern British Isles) contributions to the original Icelandic population has been debated. Recent DNA analyses of the modern population indicate that the relative contributions are dramatically skewed by gender with the majority of females deriving from Celtic origins whereas the males appear to have been predominately Norse. Estimates of total population based on a survey of independent farmers conducted around the year 1100 indicate roughly 60,000 - 70,000 individuals.’
[2]
’According to the Statistical Abstract of Iceland (1984:64-69), in 1900, before land reclamation began, there were 98,398 hectares of pasture land (homefields, not common pasture lands) in Iceland. Tomasson (1980:60) cites evidence that the area of vegetation in Iceland has decreased by half since the period of settlement. The point is that there may have been as much as about a hundred thousand hectares of land suitable for homefield pastures, [Page 253] sufficient to support a hundred thousand individuals as members of independent households, according to Commonwealth criteria. Whatever their bases for calculation, only one population estimate exceeds 100,000 and most are much lower for the entire period (Tomasson 1980:58). There must have been sufficient land for the population. Any shortage of land was due to social, not ecological factors. In addition to animal husbandry, the rich resources of fish, marine mammals, and birds have been of economic importance from the time of settlement to the present.’
[3]
But generally, low population densities and dispersed settlement patterns are assumed: ’Because agriculture was the chief economic activity, the population of Iceland was evenly distributed throughout the inhabitable parts of the country until the end of the 19th century.’
[4]
’The requirements of livestock herding insured that Icelandic land-use was characterized by low population densities, a dispersed settlement pattern, and large farmsteads. Within such farmsteads land was divided into spatial units reflecting different levels of management associated with homefields, hay-producing areas, and outer pastures. Outbuildings associated with the seasonal components of Icelandic transhumant pastoralism were scattered throughout these various land-use areas and in the upland heaths surrounding zones of intensive occupation (Bredahl-Petersen 1967; Hastrup 1985).’
[5]
[1]: Árni Daniel Júlíusson and Axel Kristissen 2017, pers. comm. to E. Brandl and D. Mullins [2]: Bolender, Douglas James and Beierle, John: eHRAF Cultural Summary for Early Icelanders [3]: Durrenberger, E. Paul 1988. “Stratification Without A State: The Collapse Of The Icelandic Commonwealth”, 252 [4]: http://www.britannica.com/place/Iceland [5]: Smith, Kevin P., and Jeffrey R. Parsons 1989. “Regional Archaeological Research In Iceland: Potentials And Possibilities”, 181 |
||||||
|
[5,500,000-6,300,000]: 1150 CE; [5,700,000-6,200,000]: 1280 CE
There are a number of different population estimates for this period I have coded 5,500,000-6,300,000: 1150CE; 5,700,000-6,200,000: 1280CE population estimate by Farris as it is the most recent [1] 5,750,000: 1100CE; 7,500,000: 1200CE; 9,750,00: 1300CE Population estimate by McEvedy and Jones. [2] [1]: Farris, William Wayne. 2006. Japan’s Medieval Population: Famine, Fertility, and Warfare in a Transformative Age. University of Hawaii Press.p.9,100. [2]: McEvedy, C and Jones, R. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books. London.p.181 |
||||||
|
Population of France and estimate for French Kingdom
1150 CE - 7 million3 million 1200 CE - 10 million4 million 1250 CE - 15 million14 million 1300 CE - 18 million17 million Population of medieval France derived from Turchin and Nefedov (2009). [1] Estimates take account of territory of France in the possession of the French Kingdom. [1] Reduction of forest cover in medieval France (estimates) [2] 1000 CE: 26 million ha forest cover 1300 CE: 13 million ha forest cover [1]: (Turchin and Nefedov 2009, 113) [2]: (Turchin and Nefedov 2009, 115) |
||||||
|
People.
In 1200 CE the Abbasids held Iraq and part of western Iran south of the Caspian. McEvedy and Jones [1] Iraq 1.5m in 1200 CE. Northernmost part of Iraq. Not controlled by Abbasids. However, likely most populated regions were under their control so will estimate 1.4m. Iran 5m in 1200 CE. However, significant population centers e.g. Shiraz and Gulf coast region, Khurasan not controlled by Abbasids. Will estimate half of total for region: 2.5m [1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 151-153) McEvedy, Colin. Jones, Richard. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books Ltd. |
||||||
|
People.
Preiser-Kapeller [1] 6,000,000: 1090 CE 10,000,000: 1150 CE 7,300,000: 1200 CE "... around 1025, although the empire occupied more or less the same amount of territory as in 750, it was more densely populated (at c.20 inhabitants per km2) and all in all more populous at roughly 18 million (between 10 and 18 million—Koder 1984/2001: 153; 19 million around 1025—Laiou 2002: 50-1; 18 million around 1050—Stein 1949-51:154)." [2] "5m in 1100 CE; 9m in 1200 CE; 2 m in 1300 CE." [3] Estimates based on McEvedy and Jones (1978). [4] 1100 CE Greece and Balkans 2m, coastal regions of Anatolia 3.5m?. 1150 CE Greece and Balkans 2m, coastal regions of Anatolia 3.5m?. 1200 CE Greece and Balkans 2m, coastal regions of Anatolia 3.5m?. According to Stein, Byzantine Empire (1951) Mid-11th Century time of Michael VIII: 5m. [5] [1]: (Preiser-Kapeller 2015) Institute for Medieval Research, Division of Byzantine Research, Austrian Academy of Sciences) [2]: (Stathakopoulos 2008, 312) Jeffreys E, Haldon J and Cormack R eds. 2008. The Oxford Handbook of Byzantine Studies. Oxford University Press. Oxford. [3]: (Palmisano, Alessio. Personal Communication to Jill Levine, Dan Hoyer, and Peter Turchin. April 2020. Email) [4]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978) McEvedy, C. Jones, R. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Allen Lane. London. [5]: (Russell 1958) Russell, J C (1958) Late and Medieval Population. Transactions of the American Philosophical Society. New Series. Vol 48. No 3. pp. 1-152 citing Stein, E. 1949-1951. Introduction a l’histoire et aux institutions byzantines, Traditio 7: 154 |
||||||
|
People.
Preiser-Kapeller [1] 6,000,000: 1090 CE 10,000,000: 1150 CE 7,300,000: 1200 CE "... around 1025, although the empire occupied more or less the same amount of territory as in 750, it was more densely populated (at c.20 inhabitants per km2) and all in all more populous at roughly 18 million (between 10 and 18 million—Koder 1984/2001: 153; 19 million around 1025—Laiou 2002: 50-1; 18 million around 1050—Stein 1949-51:154)." [2] "5m in 1100 CE; 9m in 1200 CE; 2 m in 1300 CE." [3] Estimates based on McEvedy and Jones (1978). [4] 1100 CE Greece and Balkans 2m, coastal regions of Anatolia 3.5m?. 1150 CE Greece and Balkans 2m, coastal regions of Anatolia 3.5m?. 1200 CE Greece and Balkans 2m, coastal regions of Anatolia 3.5m?. According to Stein, Byzantine Empire (1951) Mid-11th Century time of Michael VIII: 5m. [5] [1]: (Preiser-Kapeller 2015) Institute for Medieval Research, Division of Byzantine Research, Austrian Academy of Sciences) [2]: (Stathakopoulos 2008, 312) Jeffreys E, Haldon J and Cormack R eds. 2008. The Oxford Handbook of Byzantine Studies. Oxford University Press. Oxford. [3]: (Palmisano, Alessio. Personal Communication to Jill Levine, Dan Hoyer, and Peter Turchin. April 2020. Email) [4]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978) McEvedy, C. Jones, R. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Allen Lane. London. [5]: (Russell 1958) Russell, J C (1958) Late and Medieval Population. Transactions of the American Philosophical Society. New Series. Vol 48. No 3. pp. 1-152 citing Stein, E. 1949-1951. Introduction a l’histoire et aux institutions byzantines, Traditio 7: 154 |
||||||
|
People.
Preiser-Kapeller [1] 6,000,000: 1090 CE 10,000,000: 1150 CE 7,300,000: 1200 CE "... around 1025, although the empire occupied more or less the same amount of territory as in 750, it was more densely populated (at c.20 inhabitants per km2) and all in all more populous at roughly 18 million (between 10 and 18 million—Koder 1984/2001: 153; 19 million around 1025—Laiou 2002: 50-1; 18 million around 1050—Stein 1949-51:154)." [2] "5m in 1100 CE; 9m in 1200 CE; 2 m in 1300 CE." [3] Estimates based on McEvedy and Jones (1978). [4] 1100 CE Greece and Balkans 2m, coastal regions of Anatolia 3.5m?. 1150 CE Greece and Balkans 2m, coastal regions of Anatolia 3.5m?. 1200 CE Greece and Balkans 2m, coastal regions of Anatolia 3.5m?. According to Stein, Byzantine Empire (1951) Mid-11th Century time of Michael VIII: 5m. [5] [1]: (Preiser-Kapeller 2015) Institute for Medieval Research, Division of Byzantine Research, Austrian Academy of Sciences) [2]: (Stathakopoulos 2008, 312) Jeffreys E, Haldon J and Cormack R eds. 2008. The Oxford Handbook of Byzantine Studies. Oxford University Press. Oxford. [3]: (Palmisano, Alessio. Personal Communication to Jill Levine, Dan Hoyer, and Peter Turchin. April 2020. Email) [4]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978) McEvedy, C. Jones, R. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Allen Lane. London. [5]: (Russell 1958) Russell, J C (1958) Late and Medieval Population. Transactions of the American Philosophical Society. New Series. Vol 48. No 3. pp. 1-152 citing Stein, E. 1949-1951. Introduction a l’histoire et aux institutions byzantines, Traditio 7: 154 |
||||||
|
People. 1200 CE. Egypt: 2.5-3. Palestine and Jordan: 0.5. Syria and Lebanon: 1.5. Yemen: 1.5. Hijaz (my estimate from "The Interior"): 1.
[1]
Population of Egypt 2.4 million under Saladin.
[2]
Egypt: 2.4 million at the time of Saladin. [3] [1]: (McEverdy and Jones 1978) [2]: (Raymond 2000, 120) [3]: (Dols 1977, 149) |
||||||
|
People.
Estimates for Indonesia (less West New Guinea): 4.0m in 1100 CE. 4.5m in 1200 CE [1] Total area of Indonesia (less West New Guinea) 1,500,000 km2. [1] On the basis of territorial extent, Kediri, which was 50,000-70,000 km2 may have had 3-5% of the Indonesian population. 200,000 in 1100 CE, 225,000 in 120,000 CE. Will use these figures for the bottom end of a range that assumes this well-organized polity was more density populated than surrounding regions. [1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 196-201) McEvedy, Colin. Jones, Richard. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books Ltd. London. |
||||||
|
People.
"Russian Turkestan" is a reasonable approximation of the territory held by the Kara-Khanids in 1000 CE, particularly with respect to the urban areas. Estimate 2.5 million for 1000 CE. The Kara-Khanids held slightly less territory in 1200 CE, however since McEvedy and Jones considered the overall population of the region was rising have kept the estimate almost the same for 1200 CE (perhaps minus population for lost territory in Khwarazm region). [1] [1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978) McEvedy, Colin. Jones, Richard. 1987. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books Ltd. London. |
||||||
|
The following may also be relevant: Kirch
[1]
has figures for the western region of the Big Island. See Kirch
[1]
. The western part of the Big Island was low in population from 800 to 1200, then 1200-1600 very fast growth, then some decline. Many new parts of the Big Island were inhabited for the first time between 1200-1300CE, e.g. Lapahiki, Kalāhuipua’a, and ‘Anaeho’omalu
[2]
. The rate of population increase in West Big Island was the greatest during 1100-1300CE. By 1650CE there were probably 200,000 or more people in the whole archipelago. In 1100CE there were probably 20,000 in the whole archipelago
[2]
.
[1]: Kirch, P. V. 1985. Feathered Gods and Fishhooks: An Introduction to Hawaiian Archaeology and Prehistory. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. Pg. 288. [2]: Kirch, P. V. 1985. Feathered Gods and Fishhooks: An Introduction to Hawaiian Archaeology and Prehistory. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. Pg. 304 |
||||||
|
People. 32,700,000: 1142 CE; {44,705,086; 39,663,400; 36,989,014}: 1187 CE; 45,447,900: 1190 CE; 48,490,400: 1195 CE; {45,816,079; 53,532,151}: 1207 CE; 53,720,000: 1210 CE.
[1]
[2]
A Chinese source believes 53 million is too high, because similar dynasties had populations between 30 million and 40 million. "金朝人口数量(一)人口总置金朝人口发展,在其统治的北方地区,达到了比历史上几个盛大朝代更高的水平。其他各朝均只 3000 多万或 4000 多万,金朝则达到了5300 多万。对此或有不可理解,或对统计数字有怀疑." [3] [1]: (《中国人口发展史》.葛剑雄.福建人民出版社.) [2]: (《中國文明史‧宋遼金時期‧金代》〈第十一章 民俗文化與社會精神風貌〉: 第2001頁－第2022頁.) [3]: (《中国人口通史》2000. 路遇, 滕泽之. 山东人民出版社) |
||||||
|
Population of France and estimate for French Kingdom
1150 CE - 7 million3 million 1200 CE - 10 million4 million 1250 CE - 15 million14 million 1300 CE - 18 million17 million Population of medieval France derived from Turchin and Nefedov (2009). [1] Estimates take account of territory of France in the possession of the French Kingdom. [1] Reduction of forest cover in medieval France (estimates) [2] 1000 CE: 26 million ha forest cover 1300 CE: 13 million ha forest cover [1]: (Turchin and Nefedov 2009, 113) [2]: (Turchin and Nefedov 2009, 115) |
||||||
|
’Hard demographic data are extremely difficult to find. Most scholars estimate the population around 930 CE between 5.000 and 20.000, with 10.000 as the consensus figure. The population in 1262 CE is estimated to be between 50.000 and 60.000. Population estimates are usually based on data on tax paying farmers. These data allow us to establish a minimum population. Around 1100 CE there were approximately 4500 tax-paying farmers and this number is usually multiplied by seven (the number of persons per household) to arrive at the estimate for the overall population.’
[1]
Estimates given in the literature vary: ’Historical sources set the beginning of Norse settlement in Iceland at approximately 870 A.D., a date that is generally collaborated by the archaeological evidence. There was no prior inhabitation with the exception of a few Irish monks who may have periodically visited the island beginning in the eighth century. The relative proportion of Norse (primarily Norwegian) and Celtic (from the northern British Isles) contributions to the original Icelandic population has been debated. Recent DNA analyses of the modern population indicate that the relative contributions are dramatically skewed by gender with the majority of females deriving from Celtic origins whereas the males appear to have been predominately Norse. Estimates of total population based on a survey of independent farmers conducted around the year 1100 indicate roughly 60,000 - 70,000 individuals.’
[2]
’According to the Statistical Abstract of Iceland (1984:64-69), in 1900, before land reclamation began, there were 98,398 hectares of pasture land (homefields, not common pasture lands) in Iceland. Tomasson (1980:60) cites evidence that the area of vegetation in Iceland has decreased by half since the period of settlement. The point is that there may have been as much as about a hundred thousand hectares of land suitable for homefield pastures, [Page 253] sufficient to support a hundred thousand individuals as members of independent households, according to Commonwealth criteria. Whatever their bases for calculation, only one population estimate exceeds 100,000 and most are much lower for the entire period (Tomasson 1980:58). There must have been sufficient land for the population. Any shortage of land was due to social, not ecological factors. In addition to animal husbandry, the rich resources of fish, marine mammals, and birds have been of economic importance from the time of settlement to the present.’
[3]
But generally, low population densities and dispersed settlement patterns are assumed: ’Because agriculture was the chief economic activity, the population of Iceland was evenly distributed throughout the inhabitable parts of the country until the end of the 19th century.’
[4]
’The requirements of livestock herding insured that Icelandic land-use was characterized by low population densities, a dispersed settlement pattern, and large farmsteads. Within such farmsteads land was divided into spatial units reflecting different levels of management associated with homefields, hay-producing areas, and outer pastures. Outbuildings associated with the seasonal components of Icelandic transhumant pastoralism were scattered throughout these various land-use areas and in the upland heaths surrounding zones of intensive occupation (Bredahl-Petersen 1967; Hastrup 1985).’
[5]
[1]: Árni Daniel Júlíusson and Axel Kristissen 2017, pers. comm. to E. Brandl and D. Mullins [2]: Bolender, Douglas James and Beierle, John: eHRAF Cultural Summary for Early Icelanders [3]: Durrenberger, E. Paul 1988. “Stratification Without A State: The Collapse Of The Icelandic Commonwealth”, 252 [4]: http://www.britannica.com/place/Iceland [5]: Smith, Kevin P., and Jeffrey R. Parsons 1989. “Regional Archaeological Research In Iceland: Potentials And Possibilities”, 181 |
||||||
|
People.
McEvedy and Jones estimated 3 million for Russian Turkestan 1300 CE. [1] Chagatai Khanate included what likely was the most populous region (Zavastan basin) of this area? at this time (after the Mongol genocides). [1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978) McEvedy, Colin. Jones, Richard. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books Ltd. |
||||||
|
estimated population. There was a rapid population growth in the thirteenth century which led to a peak population of around 5 million by 1300. However, due to famine and plague in the early-to-mid century, the population fell again by about a third to a half of the 1300 numbers.
[1]
[1]: (Prestwich 2005: 9, 530-532) Prestwich, Michael. 2005. Plantagenet England 1225-1360. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/XTBKFDCI |
||||||
|
The following may also be relevant: Kirch
[1]
has figures for the western region of the Big Island. See Kirch
[1]
. The western part of the Big Island was low in population from 800 to 1200, then 1200-1600 very fast growth, then some decline. Many new parts of the Big Island were inhabited for the first time between 1200-1300CE, e.g. Lapahiki, Kalāhuipua’a, and ‘Anaeho’omalu
[2]
. The rate of population increase in West Big Island was the greatest during 1100-1300CE. By 1650CE there were probably 200,000 or more people in the whole archipelago. In 1100CE there were probably 20,000 in the whole archipelago
[2]
.
[1]: Kirch, P. V. 1985. Feathered Gods and Fishhooks: An Introduction to Hawaiian Archaeology and Prehistory. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. Pg. 288. [2]: Kirch, P. V. 1985. Feathered Gods and Fishhooks: An Introduction to Hawaiian Archaeology and Prehistory. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. Pg. 304 |
||||||
|
People.
[1]: 《元史‧卷五八‧志第十‧地理一》，記載：「十三年，平宋，全有版圖。二十七年，又籍之，得戶一千一百八十四萬八百有奇。於是南北之戶總書於策者，一千三百一十九萬六千二百有六，口五千八百八十三萬四千七百一十有一，而山澤溪洞之民不與焉。」 [2]: 《中國人口史》（第三卷）遼宋金元時期.第390頁.吳松弟.復旦大學出版社.2000年12月出版.《中國人口史》共六卷，由葛劍雄教授主編。 [3]: 《新元史‧卷六十八‧志第三十五‧食貨一‧戶口科差稅法 [4]: 《中國人口史》（第三卷）遼宋金元時期.第390頁.吳松弟.復旦大學出版社.2000年12月出版.《中國人口史》共六卷，由葛劍雄教授主編. |
||||||
|
People.
McEvedy and Jones [1] Iran: 3.5m Afghanistan: 1.75m "The problem in Persia is that land that has been neglected may well not be easy to bring back into cultivation. Agriculture was, in the absence of large rivers or adequate rainfall, very dependent on the qanat system of underground water channels. ... qanats require constant skilled maintenance if they are to continue to operate, many will have been ruined, not necessarily by deliberate destruction but simply through long-term neglect because the peasants had fled. ... Similarly in the case of Iraq. ... It is unlikely that Hulegu deliberately destroyed the agricultural potential of Iraq though here, too, much damage could inadvertently have been done simply through lack of proper maintenance of the irrigation canals." [2] [1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 153-155) McEvedy, Colin. Jones, Richard. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books Ltd. [2]: (Morgan 2015, 79-80) Morgan, David. 2015. Medieval Persia 1040-1797. Routledge. |
||||||
|
Population of France and estimate for French Kingdom
1150 CE - 7 million3 million 1200 CE - 10 million4 million 1250 CE - 15 million14 million 1300 CE - 18 million17 million Population of medieval France derived from Turchin and Nefedov (2009). [1] Estimates take account of territory of France in the possession of the French Kingdom. [1] Reduction of forest cover in medieval France (estimates) [2] 1000 CE: 26 million ha forest cover 1300 CE: 13 million ha forest cover [1]: (Turchin and Nefedov 2009, 113) [2]: (Turchin and Nefedov 2009, 115) |
||||||
|
[5,500,000-6,300,000]: 1150 CE; [5,700,000-6,200,000]: 1280 CE
There are a number of different population estimates for this period I have coded 5,500,000-6,300,000: 1150CE; 5,700,000-6,200,000: 1280CE population estimate by Farris as it is the most recent [1] 5,750,000: 1100CE; 7,500,000: 1200CE; 9,750,00: 1300CE Population estimate by McEvedy and Jones. [2] [1]: Farris, William Wayne. 2006. Japan’s Medieval Population: Famine, Fertility, and Warfare in a Transformative Age. University of Hawaii Press.p.9,100. [2]: McEvedy, C and Jones, R. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books. London.p.181 |
||||||
|
Population of Ottoman Empire
[1]
1,000,000: 1325 CEToo high compared to territory; rule of thumb for this period ca. 10-20 people/km2 as good estimate for medieval/Byzantine/Mediterranean provinces - thus more around 200,000-400,000. [2] 2,500,000: 1350 CEMaybe 700,000-1,4 Million; starting from 1346 effects of Black Death also in Ottoman area have to be taken into consideration - cf. the excellent new book N. VARLIK, Plague and Empire in the Early Modern Mediterranean World. The Ottoman Experience, 1347-1600. Cambridge 2015. [2] 5,000,000: 1400 CEDue to plague effects maybe in this order of magnitude, otherwise maybe larger. [2] 7,000,000: 1450 CE 9,000,000: 1500 CE 22,000,000: 1550 CE 28,000,000: 1600 CE 27,500,000: 1650 CE 24,000,000: 1700 CE 24,000,000: 1750 CE 24,000,000: 1800 CE 25,000,000: 1850 CE 25,000,000: 1900 CE [1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 137) [2]: Personal communication. Johannes Preiser-Kapeller. 2016. Institute for Medieval Research. Division of Byzantine Research. Austrian Academy of Sciences. |
||||||
|
persons. 10 Lakh is a South Asian unit of measure for 100,000 and H.M Panhwar thinks that population estimates of more than this are unlikely for the period.
[1]
I have used this earlier population estimate to factor in population loss from climate change, the outbreak of the black death, and the after effects of the Mongol conquests. An unsupported estimate of a population of 2,200,000 can be found in an article on irrigation in The Samma Kindom of the Sindh and seems to indicate the population in the later period.
[2]
[1]: Panhwar, M. H. "Chronological Dictionary of Sind, (Karachi, 1983) pp. 189 [2]: Lakho, Ghulam Muhammad, The Samma Kingdom of Sindh, (institute of Sindhology, 2006) pp.185-186 |
||||||
|
People. Approximate figures. “It has been estimated that the population of Bohemia in the fourteenth century was about two million.”
[1]
“Information about the population numbers of these extensive territories can only be estimated; for the Bohemian kingdom the figure is about two and half to three million people. In the years 1348–1350 Bohemia and Moravia were struck by plague, which was referred to as the Black Death. While in Italy and other southern countries in Europe, where it entered from Asia Minor, it became a pandemic that decimated the populations of large towns and whole territories; in the Bohemian crown lands it was not as intense. To the end of the 14th century, the fall in population numbers evened out and since the Bohemian crown lands had not been afflicted by any wars, a certain increase in population occurred.”
[2]
“Crisis caught up with the Bohemian lands at the end of the fourteenth century, beginning with the belated arrival of the plague in 1380. It carried off up to 15 per cent of the population, reducing demand and disrupting production.”
[3]
[1]: (Fudge 2010: 20) Fudge, Thomas A. 2010. Jan Hus: Religious Reform and Social Revolution in Bohemia. London; New York: I. B. Tauris. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/Z325C95F [2]: (Pánek and Oldřich 2009: 141) Pánek, Jaroslav and Oldřich, Tůma. 2009. A History of the Czech Lands. University of Chicago Press. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/4NAX9KBJ [3]: (Agnew 2004: 38) Agnew, Hugh LeCaine. 2004. The Czechs and the Lands of the Bohemian Crown. California: Hoover Institution Press. http://archive.org/details/czechslandsofboh0000agne. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/6LBQ5ARI |
||||||
|
Population of Ottoman Empire
[1]
1,000,000: 1325 CEToo high compared to territory; rule of thumb for this period ca. 10-20 people/km2 as good estimate for medieval/Byzantine/Mediterranean provinces - thus more around 200,000-400,000. [2] 2,500,000: 1350 CEMaybe 700,000-1,4 Million; starting from 1346 effects of Black Death also in Ottoman area have to be taken into consideration - cf. the excellent new book N. VARLIK, Plague and Empire in the Early Modern Mediterranean World. The Ottoman Experience, 1347-1600. Cambridge 2015. [2] 5,000,000: 1400 CEDue to plague effects maybe in this order of magnitude, otherwise maybe larger. [2] 7,000,000: 1450 CE 9,000,000: 1500 CE 22,000,000: 1550 CE 28,000,000: 1600 CE 27,500,000: 1650 CE 24,000,000: 1700 CE 24,000,000: 1750 CE 24,000,000: 1800 CE 25,000,000: 1850 CE 25,000,000: 1900 CE [1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 137) [2]: Personal communication. Johannes Preiser-Kapeller. 2016. Institute for Medieval Research. Division of Byzantine Research. Austrian Academy of Sciences. |
||||||
|
Population of France and estimate for French Kingdom
1350 CE - 12 million11.5 million 1400 CE - 10 million9 million 1450 CE - 11 million9.5 million Population of medieval France derived from Turchin and Nefedov (2009). [1] Estimates take account of territory of France in the possession of the French Kingdom. [1] Plague from 1348 CE. [2] [1]: (Turchin and Nefedov 2009, 113) [2]: (Turchin and Nefedov 2009, 142) |
||||||
|
estimated population. There was a rapid population growth in the thirteenth century which led to a peak population of around 5 million by 1300. However, due to famine and plague in the early-to-mid century, the population fell again by about a third to a half of the 1300 numbers.
[1]
[1]: (Prestwich 2005: 9, 530-532) Prestwich, Michael. 2005. Plantagenet England 1225-1360. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/XTBKFDCI |
||||||
|
People. Typical population for one of the Tairona polities, estimated from the Upper Buritaca region: "CIUDAD PERDIDA region. Wilson estimated the population at 7200 but using an arbitrary number of inhabitants by ha. Castaño estimated it at 3000 inhabitants. Rodriguez: between 1400-3000. Rodriguez and Botero: Alto Buritaca and Nulicuandecue would have had 8000 people at 66 people per ha, and Ciudad Perdida 1716 inhabitants. Serje estimated 1500 people."
[1]
[360,000-500,000] is an estimate for the NGA in total. "Though there are no reliable population estimates for the area, Spanish documents dating from the 16th century constantly mention that it was very densely populated. Projections made on very rough population numbers calculated by the Spanish authorities around 1593 suggest that at the time of contact with Europeans, at least 250,000 people inhabited the northern and western portions of the Sierra Nevada. Dever’s (2007: 207) more recent calculations estimate population densities to be around 120 people per km2, which give us a total of 360,000 persons for an area of approximately 3000 km2. Less conservative estimates place the number at around 500,000 (Restrepo 1953). Given the fact that new sites continue to be found on a yearly basis or become visible as large swaths of forest in the Sierra Nevada are cut down for ranching and cultivation, it is quite possible that even these less conservative figures may be a low estimate." [2] Information from Langebaek 2005 [1] : THREE LARGEST BAYS. Murdy estimated the population for the three largest bays: 165 in Concha, 150-200 in Neguanje and 150-200 in Cinto. Including Guachiquita, Palmarito ad Taganga, that’s 650-800 inhabitants for the zone. PUEBLITO. Reichel-Dolmatoff and Groot estimate the number of dwellings of Pueblito at about 1000. Murdy estimates the number of dwellings at 500-1000 and the population between 3000 and 5000 inhabitants. Engel had estimated the number of inhabitants at 1000. Wynn estimated a population ranging between 4500 and 5000. CIUDAD PERDIDA. Wilson estimated the population at 7200 but using an arbitrary number of inhabitants by ha. Castaño estimated it at 3000 inhabitants. Rodriguez: between 1400-3000. Rodriguez and Botero: Alto Buritaca and Nulicuandecue would have had 8000 people at 66 people per ha, and Ciudad Perdida 1716 inhabitants. Serje estimated 1500 people. BAY OF GAIRACA. Lleras estimates the population at 350-500 people using data from water wells. Adding the lowest figures, the estimate in total comes to about 3500 inhabitants. Adding the highest figures, it comes to about 14,300. Study of the Santa Marta Bays, a survey area of 90.78 square km: "The population dynamics may be compared in absolute terms, although this is always a risky exercise. If a density of 5 to 10 persons per occupied hectare (Sanders, Parsons and Santley 1979:34-40) were assumed, then there would be between 90 and 179 persons for the Neguanje Period; between 95 and 190 for the Buritaca Period; between 1087 and 2174 for the Late Period; and only between 30 and 59 for the period after the Spanish invasion." [3] Study of the Santa Marta Bays, a survey area of 90.78 square km: "The population dynamics may be compared in absolute terms, although this is always a risky exercise. If a density of 5 to 10 persons per occupied hectare (Sanders, Parsons and Santley 1979:34-40) were assumed, then there would be between 90 and 179 persons for the Neguanje Period; between 95 and 190 for the Buritaca Period; between 1087 and 2174 for the Late Period; and only between 30 and 59 for the period after the Spanish invasion." [3] This is an estimate for one of the polities, supposedly centered on the Santa Marta Bays between the 10th and 16th centuries. Because there is better resolution for the later Tairona polities, the code here will be applied to the 10th-14th century only. [1]: (Langebaek 2005, 25-7) [2]: (Giraldo 2010, 57-58) [3]: (Langebaek 2005, 91) |
||||||
|
People. Approximate figures. “It has been estimated that the population of Bohemia in the fourteenth century was about two million.”
[1]
“Information about the population numbers of these extensive territories can only be estimated; for the Bohemian kingdom the figure is about two and half to three million people. In the years 1348–1350 Bohemia and Moravia were struck by plague, which was referred to as the Black Death. While in Italy and other southern countries in Europe, where it entered from Asia Minor, it became a pandemic that decimated the populations of large towns and whole territories; in the Bohemian crown lands it was not as intense. To the end of the 14th century, the fall in population numbers evened out and since the Bohemian crown lands had not been afflicted by any wars, a certain increase in population occurred.”
[2]
“Crisis caught up with the Bohemian lands at the end of the fourteenth century, beginning with the belated arrival of the plague in 1380. It carried off up to 15 per cent of the population, reducing demand and disrupting production.”
[3]
[1]: (Fudge 2010: 20) Fudge, Thomas A. 2010. Jan Hus: Religious Reform and Social Revolution in Bohemia. London; New York: I. B. Tauris. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/Z325C95F [2]: (Pánek and Oldřich 2009: 141) Pánek, Jaroslav and Oldřich, Tůma. 2009. A History of the Czech Lands. University of Chicago Press. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/4NAX9KBJ [3]: (Agnew 2004: 38) Agnew, Hugh LeCaine. 2004. The Czechs and the Lands of the Bohemian Crown. California: Hoover Institution Press. http://archive.org/details/czechslandsofboh0000agne. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/6LBQ5ARI |
||||||
|
900,000: 1400 CE; 1,600,000: 1500 CE This figure is from Black.
[1]
The population of the papal states was severely affected by the Black Death (1347-49) and subsequent plague cycles (in particular, the plague of 1363 seems to have had a major impact). Black’s estimate would make the Papal State roughly equal to that of the Veneto: in the sixteenth century Venice and its Terrafirma were estimated to contain around one and a half million people.
[2]
Whereas the Veneto was mostly arable flatland in the Po River Valley, much of the Papal States was mountainous and contained dispersed or scarce population, so the total population may have been lower, especially in the immediate aftermath of the plague cycles of 1347-1349 and 1363-1364. Black has estimated that Italy as a whole had around 11 million people in 1500.
[3]
ET: McEvedy and Jones estimated that Italy as a whole had around 10,000,000 people in 1500 CE and 7,000,000 in 1400 CE after the Black Death "cut the population back by about a third." [4] The estimate we have for the preceding century is 300,000-1,500,000. 900,000 (mid-point figure) minus a third gives an estimate of 600,000 for 1400 CE. [1]: Black, 218 [2]: Braudel, 846 [3]: Black, 21 [4]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 107) |
||||||
|
Population of France and estimate for French Kingdom
1350 CE - 12 million11.5 million 1400 CE - 10 million9 million 1450 CE - 11 million9.5 million Population of medieval France derived from Turchin and Nefedov (2009). [1] Estimates take account of territory of France in the possession of the French Kingdom. [1] Plague from 1348 CE. [2] [1]: (Turchin and Nefedov 2009, 113) [2]: (Turchin and Nefedov 2009, 142) |
||||||
|
people
Population of 1393 CE [3] :
[1]: 《明太祖實錄 卷140》 [2]: 《明孝宗實錄 卷194》 [3]: 第五章 〈封建社會唐（後期）宋遼金元的經濟〉//《中國古代經濟簡史》. 復旦大學. 1982年: 第154頁－第165頁 [4]: (http://afe.easia.columbia.edu/special/china_1950_population.htm) |
||||||
|
Population of Ottoman Empire
[1]
1,000,000: 1325 CEToo high compared to territory; rule of thumb for this period ca. 10-20 people/km2 as good estimate for medieval/Byzantine/Mediterranean provinces - thus more around 200,000-400,000. [2] 2,500,000: 1350 CEMaybe 700,000-1,4 Million; starting from 1346 effects of Black Death also in Ottoman area have to be taken into consideration - cf. the excellent new book N. VARLIK, Plague and Empire in the Early Modern Mediterranean World. The Ottoman Experience, 1347-1600. Cambridge 2015. [2] 5,000,000: 1400 CEDue to plague effects maybe in this order of magnitude, otherwise maybe larger. [2] 7,000,000: 1450 CE 9,000,000: 1500 CE 22,000,000: 1550 CE 28,000,000: 1600 CE 27,500,000: 1650 CE 24,000,000: 1700 CE 24,000,000: 1750 CE 24,000,000: 1800 CE 25,000,000: 1850 CE 25,000,000: 1900 CE [1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 137) [2]: Personal communication. Johannes Preiser-Kapeller. 2016. Institute for Medieval Research. Division of Byzantine Research. Austrian Academy of Sciences. |
||||||
|
a number of different estimates exist for this time period. I have coded 9,750,000: 1300CE; 12,500,000: 1400CE;17,000,000: 1500CE; Population estimate by McEvedy and Jones as it provides estimates throughout the period.
[1]
9,600,000-10,500,000: 1450CE population estimate by Farris
[2]
[1]: McEvedy, C and Jones, R. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books. London.p.181 [2]: Farris, William Wayne. 2006. Japan’s Medieval Population: Famine, Fertility, and Warfare in a Transformative Age. University of Hawaii Press.p.94. |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
The following may also be relevant: Kirch
[1]
has figures for the western region of the Big Island. See Kirch
[1]
. The western part of the Big Island was low in population from 800 to 1200, then 1200-1600 very fast growth, then some decline. Many new parts of the Big Island were inhabited for the first time between 1200-1300CE, e.g. Lapahiki, Kalāhuipua’a, and ‘Anaeho’omalu
[2]
. The rate of population increase in West Big Island was the greatest during 1100-1300CE. By 1650CE there were probably 200,000 or more people in the whole archipelago. In 1100CE there were probably 20,000 in the whole archipelago
[2]
.
[1]: Kirch, P. V. 1985. Feathered Gods and Fishhooks: An Introduction to Hawaiian Archaeology and Prehistory. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. Pg. 288. [2]: Kirch, P. V. 1985. Feathered Gods and Fishhooks: An Introduction to Hawaiian Archaeology and Prehistory. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. Pg. 304 |
||||||
|
People.
1400 CE [1] Iraq: 1.0m Iran: 3.5m Caucasia: 1.0m Russian Turkestan: 3.4m North Pakistan and Delhi region of India (Upper Indus and Upper Ganges): 40.0m. Estimate reasoning: 94.0m for whole of the Indian Subcontinent. If 60% population of India c500 BCE was in the Ganges Basin (67% under the Guptas) and "The next fifteen hundred years consolidated without significantly altering this pattern" [2] then about 56.0m should be within the Ganges Basin. Timur held only about 50% of the Ganges Basin so for this territory we could estimate 28.0m. Of the 38.0 remaining for the rest of the sub-continent it is likely the Indus Basin contains the majority. If 60% of remaining is in the Indus Basin then we could say 23.0m for the whole Indus Basin. Timur held the north of the Indus Basin so for this territory we could estimate 12.0m. [1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978) McEverdy, Collins. Jones, Richard. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books Ltd. [2]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 182) McEverdy, Collins. Jones, Richard. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books Ltd. |
||||||
|
Population of France and estimate for French Kingdom
1350 CE - 12 million11.5 million 1400 CE - 10 million9 million 1450 CE - 11 million9.5 million Population of medieval France derived from Turchin and Nefedov (2009). [1] Estimates take account of territory of France in the possession of the French Kingdom. [1] Plague from 1348 CE. [2] [1]: (Turchin and Nefedov 2009, 113) [2]: (Turchin and Nefedov 2009, 142) |
||||||
|
People.
Population of Ottoman Empire [1] 1,000,000: 1325 CE 2,500,000: 1350 CE 5,000,000: 1400 CE 7,000,000: 1450 CE 9,000,000: 1500 CE9,000,000: 1500 CE Seems possible, according to tax registers, there were 872,000 households in Ottoman Anatolia in 1520, cf. H. İNALCIK, An Economic and Social History of the Ottoman Empire, Volume I: 1300-1600. Cambridge 1997. [2] [1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 137) [2]: Personal communication. Johannes Preiser-Kapeller. 2016. Institute for Medieval Research. Division of Byzantine Research. Austrian Academy of Sciences. |
||||||
|
Catastrophic collapse: 1350-1450 CE. Patchy revival: 1450-1500 CE. Population boom: 1500-1550 CE. Hesitated: 1550-1600 CE.
[1]
[10,000,000-12,000,000]: 1470s CE [2] (Mousnier) 18,000,000: 1515 CE [3] (Pierre Chaunu) 16,000,000: 1500 CE [3] (Ladurie) 20,000,000: 1560 CE [3] Urbanization: 6-10% "much birth in the country, much death in the town." [4] [5] [1]: (Potter 1995, 7-8) [2]: (Potter 1995, 170) [3]: (Potter 1995, 8) [4]: (Potter 1995, 9 [5]: cite: Dupaquier 1996, 394) |
||||||
|
’’’♠ Luxury spices, incense and dyes ♣ suspected unknown♥ It is unclear which, if any, spices were considered luxurious. ’’’ “However, the Portuguese were not quite so successful as they had hoped in exploiting Africa’s resources. Certainly, the Songhai in any case managed to monopolise the Saharan caravan trade which brought rock salt and luxury goods like fine cloth, glassware, sugar, and horses to the Sudan region in exchange for gold, ivory, spices, kola nuts, hides, and slaves. Timbuktu, with a population of around 100,000 in the mid-15th century, continued to thrive as a trade ’port’ and as a centre of learning into the 16th and 17th centuries when the city boasted many mosques and 150-180 Koranic schools.”
[1]
“Niger society was an ordered and cultivated society, at least at the level of the aristocracy. They liked ample garments and babush, the easy life of the home, highly spiced food and above all good company. This led to a certain moral laxity, as indicated by the numerous courtesans and the debauchery among the princely aristocracy.”
[2]
:’’’♠ place of production of luxury spices, incense and dyes ♣ ♥’’’ :’’’♠ consumption of luxury spices, incense and dyes by ruler ♣ inferred present♥ ’’’ “Niger society was an ordered and cultivated society, at least at the level of the aristocracy. They liked ample garments and babush, the easy life of the home, highly spiced food and above all good company. This led to a certain moral laxity, as indicated by the numerous courtesans and the debauchery among the princely aristocracy.” [2] :’’’♠ consumption of luxury spices, incense and dyes by elite ♣ inferred absent♥ ’’’ “Niger society was an ordered and cultivated society, at least at the level of the aristocracy. They liked ample garments and babush, the easy life of the home, highly spiced food and above all good company. This led to a certain moral laxity, as indicated by the numerous courtesans and the debauchery among the princely aristocracy.” [2] :’’’♠ consumption of luxury spices, incense and dyes by common people ♣ ♥ ’’’ [1]: Cartwright, M., 2018. Songhai Empire. World History Encyclopedia. Available at: https://www.worldhistory.org/Songhai_Empire/ [Accessed November 2023]. [2]: Cissoko, S.M., 1984. The Shongay from the 12th to the 16th Century, in General history of Africa, IV: Africa from the twelfth to the sixteenth century, UNESCO General History of Africa. Ed. D.T. Niane. Pg 207. |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
Catastrophic collapse: 1350-1450 CE. Patchy revival: 1450-1500 CE. Population boom: 1500-1550 CE. Hesitated: 1550-1600 CE.
[1]
[10,000,000-12,000,000]: 1470s CE [2] (Mousnier) 18,000,000: 1515 CE [3] (Pierre Chaunu) 16,000,000: 1500 CE [3] (Ladurie) 20,000,000: 1560 CE [3] Urbanization: 6-10% "much birth in the country, much death in the town." [4] [5] [1]: (Potter 1995, 7-8) [2]: (Potter 1995, 170) [3]: (Potter 1995, 8) [4]: (Potter 1995, 9 [5]: cite: Dupaquier 1996, 394) |
||||||
|
People.
Population of Ottoman Empire [1] 1,000,000: 1325 CE 2,500,000: 1350 CE 5,000,000: 1400 CE 7,000,000: 1450 CE 9,000,000: 1500 CE9,000,000: 1500 CE Seems possible, according to tax registers, there were 872,000 households in Ottoman Anatolia in 1520, cf. H. İNALCIK, An Economic and Social History of the Ottoman Empire, Volume I: 1300-1600. Cambridge 1997. [2] [1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 137) [2]: Personal communication. Johannes Preiser-Kapeller. 2016. Institute for Medieval Research. Division of Byzantine Research. Austrian Academy of Sciences. |
||||||
|
The following may also be relevant: Kirch
[1]
has figures for the western region of the Big Island. See Kirch
[1]
. The western part of the Big Island was low in population from 800 to 1200, then 1200-1600 very fast growth, then some decline. Many new parts of the Big Island were inhabited for the first time between 1200-1300CE, e.g. Lapahiki, Kalāhuipua’a, and ‘Anaeho’omalu
[2]
. The rate of population increase in West Big Island was the greatest during 1100-1300CE. By 1650CE there were probably 200,000 or more people in the whole archipelago. In 1100CE there were probably 20,000 in the whole archipelago
[2]
.
[1]: Kirch, P. V. 1985. Feathered Gods and Fishhooks: An Introduction to Hawaiian Archaeology and Prehistory. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. Pg. 288. [2]: Kirch, P. V. 1985. Feathered Gods and Fishhooks: An Introduction to Hawaiian Archaeology and Prehistory. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. Pg. 304 |
||||||
|
a number of different estimates exist for this time period. I have coded 9,750,000: 1300CE; 12,500,000: 1400CE;17,000,000: 1500CE; Population estimate by McEvedy and Jones as it provides estimates throughout the period.
[1]
9,600,000-10,500,000: 1450CE population estimate by Farris
[2]
[1]: McEvedy, C and Jones, R. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books. London.p.181 [2]: Farris, William Wayne. 2006. Japan’s Medieval Population: Famine, Fertility, and Warfare in a Transformative Age. University of Hawaii Press.p.94. |
||||||
|
people
Population of 1393 CE [3] :
[1]: 《明太祖實錄 卷140》 [2]: 《明孝宗實錄 卷194》 [3]: 第五章 〈封建社會唐（後期）宋遼金元的經濟〉//《中國古代經濟簡史》. 復旦大學. 1982年: 第154頁－第165頁 [4]: (http://afe.easia.columbia.edu/special/china_1950_population.htm) |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
900,000: 1400 CE; 1,600,000: 1500 CE This figure is from Black.
[1]
The population of the papal states was severely affected by the Black Death (1347-49) and subsequent plague cycles (in particular, the plague of 1363 seems to have had a major impact). Black’s estimate would make the Papal State roughly equal to that of the Veneto: in the sixteenth century Venice and its Terrafirma were estimated to contain around one and a half million people.
[2]
Whereas the Veneto was mostly arable flatland in the Po River Valley, much of the Papal States was mountainous and contained dispersed or scarce population, so the total population may have been lower, especially in the immediate aftermath of the plague cycles of 1347-1349 and 1363-1364. Black has estimated that Italy as a whole had around 11 million people in 1500.
[3]
ET: McEvedy and Jones estimated that Italy as a whole had around 10,000,000 people in 1500 CE and 7,000,000 in 1400 CE after the Black Death "cut the population back by about a third." [4] The estimate we have for the preceding century is 300,000-1,500,000. 900,000 (mid-point figure) minus a third gives an estimate of 600,000 for 1400 CE. [1]: Black, 218 [2]: Braudel, 846 [3]: Black, 21 [4]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 107) |
||||||
|
People.In 1500 the territories held 1-1.5 million subjects.
[1]
By the beginning of the sixteenth century there were around 4 million people in Bohemia, 2 million in Hungary and 2 million in Austria.
[2]
[1]: (Fichtner 2003: 8) Fichtner, Paula Sutter. 2003. The Habsburg Monarchy, 1490-1848: Attributes of Empire. Macmillan International Higher Education. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/QQ77TV4K [2]: (Curtis 2013: 90) Curtis, Benjamin. 2013. The Habsburgs: The History of a Dynasty. London; New York: Bloomsbury. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/TRKUBP92 |
||||||
|
Catastrophic collapse: 1350-1450 CE. Patchy revival: 1450-1500 CE. Population boom: 1500-1550 CE. Hesitated: 1550-1600 CE.
[1]
[10,000,000-12,000,000]: 1470s CE [2] (Mousnier) 18,000,000: 1515 CE [3] (Pierre Chaunu) 16,000,000: 1500 CE [3] (Ladurie) 20,000,000: 1560 CE [3] Urbanization: 6-10% "much birth in the country, much death in the town." [4] [5] [1]: (Potter 1995, 7-8) [2]: (Potter 1995, 170) [3]: (Potter 1995, 8) [4]: (Potter 1995, 9 [5]: cite: Dupaquier 1996, 394) |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
persons. 10 Lakh is a South Asian unit of measure for 100,000 and H.M Panhwar thinks that population estimates of more than this are unlikely for the period.
[1]
I have used this earlier population estimate to factor in population loss from climate change, the outbreak of the black death, and the after effects of the Mongol conquests. An unsupported estimate of a population of 2,200,000 can be found in an article on irrigation in The Samma Kindom of the Sindh and seems to indicate the population in the later period.
[2]
[1]: Panhwar, M. H. "Chronological Dictionary of Sind, (Karachi, 1983) pp. 189 [2]: Lakho, Ghulam Muhammad, The Samma Kingdom of Sindh, (institute of Sindhology, 2006) pp.185-186 |
||||||
|
Approved of as "reasonably vague" by Alan Covey.
[1]
Cook 1980 [2] has done a thoughtful overview of Andean demography and the Inca population at the time of contact [3] . Cook reaches an estimate of 5.5 million to 9.4 million inhabitants [4] , but he favours the upper range of this estimate, settling on a number of 9 million [5] . However, Alan Covey has pointed out the methodological weaknesses of Cook’s work, which is inferred from documentary evidence compiled decades after the fall of the Incas [3] . A possible estimate for the period between 1375-1420 CE would be an inferred 150,000-250,000 inhabitants, based on data for the Killke period (note that the data provides an estimate of 35,000 for the core region; the estimate used for 1400 CE infers a larger population over a territory of 41,000 km2): Sacred Valley Archaeological Project survey region after "Inka consolidation of the Cusco region" [6] - undated, presumably 1200-1400 CE? Key: Big dot = over 10 ha; medium dot = 5-10 ha; small dots = 1-5 ha; circle and ? = Size unknown. Map has 31 small dots, 4 medium dots, 2 large dots and 3 size unknown. If small dots average 2.5 ha, medium dots 7.5 ha, and the largest dots are 15 ha, and size unknown are 5 ha total urban area of survey area is 152.5 ha. If we assign 150 per ha to small dots (11,625), 300 per ha to medium dots (9,000), 400 per ha to the large dots (12,000), and 200 ha to unknown dots (3,000), estimated urban population (sites > 1 ha) of the Sacred Valley Archeological Project survey region after 1200 CE (?) is 35,625. Cuzco valley: 10,000-20,000. According to a Spaniard in mid 16th century, valley held over 20,000 [7] Alan Covey: But another Spaniard estimated a population of ten times that size. [3] Sacred Valley Archeological Project survey region: 35,625 - 40,000. First figure is estimated urban population (sites > 1 ha) of the valley after 1200 CE (?) "Spanning over 4,000 km of western South America and encompassing more than ten million inhabitants, Tawantinsuyu was a century-long latecomer to Andean civilization, built on more than three millennia of complex societies." [8] "Given the complexity of the population problem and the limitations of all the methodologies used by various scholars, it seems unlikely that we shall ever be able to determine an accurate population figure. Nevertheless, these attempts have helped narrow the range of estimates. Most modern Inca scholars seem to accept and work with figures ranging between 6 million and 14 million people." [9] 8,000,000: 1532 CE [10] [1]: (Alan Covey, pers. comm.) [2]: (Noble David Cook. 2014. Demographic Collapse: Indian Peru, 1520-1620. Cambridge: CUP [3]: (Covey 2015, personal communication) [4]: (Cook 2004: 113) Noble David Cook. 2014. Demographic Collapse: Indian Peru, 1520-1620. Cambridge: CUP [5]: (Cook 2004: 114) Noble David Cook. 2014. Demographic Collapse: Indian Peru, 1520-1620. Cambridge: CUP [6]: (Covey 2003, 343) [7]: (Bauer 2004, 189, 227) [8]: (D’Altroy 2014, xv) [9]: (McEwan 2006, 96) [10]: (Bauer 2004, 1) |
||||||
|
People.
"By the middle of the 16th century, The 7.5 million inhabitants of the Spanish kingdoms were the mainstay of the Habsburg Empire, which controlled more than 20 of Europe’s 90 millions and 9m of the 12m natives in the New World." [1] Spain: 7,500,000: 1540 CE; 8,500,000: 1590-1600 CE; 7,000,000: 1700 CE [2] [3] Iberian Union: 29,997,000: 1580-1640 CE (estimate from Wikipedia, needs checking and citation) Spain and Portugal: 9,000,000-9,500,000: 1600 CE [3] [1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 99-100) McEvedy, Colin and Richard Jones. 1978. Atlas of world population history. Great Britain: Penguin. https://www.zotero.org/groups/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/6U4QZXCG [2]: (Payne 1973, 291) Payne, Stanley G. 1973. A History of Spain and Portugal, Volume 1, Madison, Wisconsin: University of Wisconsin Press. http://libro.uca.edu/payne1/payne15.htm https://www.zotero.org/groups/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/6MIH95XP [3]: (Payne 1973, 267) Payne, Stanley G. 1973. A History of Spain and Portugal, Volume 1. Madison, Wisconsin: University of Wisconsin Press. http://libro.uca.edu/payne1/payne15.htm https://www.zotero.org/groups/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/6MIH95XP |
||||||
|
Catastrophic collapse: 1350-1450 CE. Patchy revival: 1450-1500 CE. Population boom: 1500-1550 CE. Hesitated: 1550-1600 CE.
[1]
[10,000,000-12,000,000]: 1470s CE [2] (Mousnier) 18,000,000: 1515 CE [3] (Pierre Chaunu) 16,000,000: 1500 CE [3] (Ladurie) 20,000,000: 1560 CE [3] Urbanization: 6-10% "much birth in the country, much death in the town." [4] [5] [1]: (Potter 1995, 7-8) [2]: (Potter 1995, 170) [3]: (Potter 1995, 8) [4]: (Potter 1995, 9 [5]: cite: Dupaquier 1996, 394) |
||||||
|
People.
"At the height of its power in the sixteenth century, the city of Venice counted nearly 170,000 souls, with a population of more than two million in its subject territories." [1] [1]: (Martin and Romano 2000, 1) John Martin. Dennis Romano. Reconsidering Venice. John Martin. Dennis Romano. eds. 2000. Venice Reconsidered: The History and Civilization of an Italian City-State 1297-1797. The Johns Hopkins University Press. Baltimore. |
||||||
|
people
Population of 1393 CE [3] :
[1]: 《明太祖實錄 卷140》 [2]: 《明孝宗實錄 卷194》 [3]: 第五章 〈封建社會唐（後期）宋遼金元的經濟〉//《中國古代經濟簡史》. 復旦大學. 1982年: 第154頁－第165頁 [4]: (http://afe.easia.columbia.edu/special/china_1950_population.htm) |
||||||
|
People. The Britannica gives a number of 12,000, but seems to refer to the period immediately preceding the American Revolution: ’For a century and a quarter before the American Revolution, the Iroquois stood athwart the path from Albany to the Great Lakes, keeping the route from permanent settlement by the French and containing the Dutch and the English. In the 18th century the Six Nations remained consistent and bitter enemies of the French, who were allied with their traditional foes. The Iroquois became dependent on the British in Albany for European goods (which were cheaper there than in Montreal), and thus Albany was never attacked. The Iroquois’ success in maintaining their autonomy vis-à-vis both the French and English was a remarkable achievement for an aboriginal people that could field only 2,200 men from a total population of scarcely 12,000. During the American Revolution, a schism developed among the Iroquois. The Oneida and Tuscarora espoused the American cause, while the rest of the league, led by Chief Joseph Brant’s Mohawk loyalists, fought for the British out of Niagara, decimating several isolated American settlements. The fields, orchards, and granaries, as well as the morale of the Iroquois, were destroyed in 1779 when U.S. Major General John Sullivan led a retaliatory expedition of 4,000 Americans against them, defeating them near present-day Elmira, New York. Having acknowledged defeat in the Second Treaty of Fort Stanwix (1784), the Iroquois Confederacy effectively came to an end. In a treaty that was made at Canandaigua, New York, 10 years later, the Iroquois and the United States each pledged not to disturb the other in lands that had been relinquished or reserved. Of the Six Nations, the Onondaga, Seneca, and Tuscarora remained in New York, eventually settling on reservations; the Mohawk and Cayuga withdrew to Canada; and, a generation later, a large group of the Oneida departed for Wisconsin.’
[1]
eHRAF gives the total number of Iroquois at 5,500 for the beginning of the 17th century: ’In 1600 the population of the Five Nations is estimated to have been about 5,500 and that of the Tuscarora about 5,000.’
[2]
We have chosen to follow the eHRAF estimate.
[1]: http://www.britannica.com/topic/Iroquois-Confederacy [2]: Reid, Gerald: eHRAF Cultural Summary for the Iroquois |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
People. 22,000,000: 1550 CE; 28,000,000: 1600 CE; 27,500,000: 1650 CE
Population of Ottoman Empire [1] 1,000,000: 1325 CE 2,500,000: 1350 CE 5,000,000: 1400 CE 7,000,000: 1450 CE 9,000,000: 1500 CE 22,000,000: 1550 CE 28,000,000: 1600 CE 27,500,000: 1650 CE 24,000,000: 1700 CE 24,000,000: 1750 CE 24,000,000: 1800 CE 25,000,000: 1850 CE 25,000,000: 1900 CE Population growth in Anatolia. 1520-1530 CE: 872,610. 1570-1580 CE: 1,360,474. [2] [1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 137) [2]: (Inalcik and Quataert 1997, 28) Halil Inalcik and Donald Quataert. 1997. ’General Introduction’ in An Economic and Social History of the Ottoman Empire. Volume One: 1300-1600 edited by Halil Inalcik with Donald Quataert. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. |
||||||
|
People.
Populations of Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Tadzikhistan, Kirghizstan [1] : 1600 CE: 4 million people 1700 CE: 4.5 million people AD: The Khanate of Bukhara would only represent a small portion of that estimate, perhaps 1/5th of the population.Considering that this is an estimate based on an estimate (!) it should be double-checked by an expert.However a rough population number for the Bukhara Khanate could be comprised between 500,000 and 1.2 million people in 1600 CE and between 600,000 and 1.4 million people in 1700 CE. (arbitrary estimates, RA’s guess!) [1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 164) |
||||||
|
People.
"Despite the growing intimacy of Manchu-Mongol ties, one major Mon- gol leader, Ligdan (Linden) Khan of the Chahars, resolutely opposed the growing Manchu power. As the last descendant of Chinggis Khan, he held an official Yuan seal and viewed himself as the legitimate representative of the Mongolian imperial tradition. But after his losses in battle to the Man- chus in 1628 and 1632, the Manchus took over the Yuan seal and enrolled the Eastern Mongols as a whole in the banner system. Ligdan Khan’s son married a Manchu princess after Ligdan died of smallpox in Qinghai. The Chahar and Khalkha Mongols comprised 384 niru with 19,580 families, the Khorcin 448 niru with 22,308 families." [1] So the total population of the Chahar and Khalkhas in the 1630s was comprised between 58,740 and 156,640 people using an estimate of 3-8 people per family. Halving this figure to exclude the Chahar, we get a rough population estimate of 30,000-80,000 people for the Khalkhas. [1]: (Perdue 2005, 125) |
||||||
|
People.In 1500 the territories held 1-1.5 million subjects.
[1]
By the beginning of the sixteenth century there were around 4 million people in Bohemia, 2 million in Hungary and 2 million in Austria.
[2]
[1]: (Fichtner 2003: 8) Fichtner, Paula Sutter. 2003. The Habsburg Monarchy, 1490-1848: Attributes of Empire. Macmillan International Higher Education. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/QQ77TV4K [2]: (Curtis 2013: 90) Curtis, Benjamin. 2013. The Habsburgs: The History of a Dynasty. London; New York: Bloomsbury. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/TRKUBP92 |
||||||
|
People. “Abomey, an expansive community settled around a marketplace and a series of royal palace compounds, emerged as greater Dahomey’s political capital and home to as many as 30,000 in the 18th century. Nearby Cana also became a significant center on the plateau in this period. It was a major node in regional administration and interregional trade routes, with significant regional markets and as many as 15,000 inhabitants in the 18th century. Historical population estimates suggest 21 to 33 percent of the plateau’s population lived at Abomey and Cana.”
[1]
“On the eve of European penetration the Dahomey kingdom stretched from the important coastal ports of Whydah and Cotonou to the eighth parallel, excluding Savé and Savalou. […] The Dahomey kingdom thus stretched almost two hundred miles from north to south , and one hundred miles from east to west. Its population has been estimated roughly at two hundred thousand.”
[2]
[1]: Monroe, J. C. (2011). Urbanism on West Africa’s Slave Coast: Archaeology sheds new light on cities in the era of the Atlantic slave trade. American Scientist, 99(5), 400–409: 406. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/E5WA63Z2/collection [2]: Lombard, J. (1976). The Kingdom of Dahomey. In West African Kingdoms in the Nineteenth Century (Repr, pp. 70–92). Published for the International African Institute by Oxford University Press: 70. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/T6WTVSHZ/collection |
||||||
|
During this period population census were carried out ‘However, the accuracy of such statistics varies greatly, as the surveys often neglected different demographics like members of the samurai household, children, and others’.
[1]
A number of scholars have used various methods based on the census and other data to provide estimates that more accurately reflect the actual population. 22,000,000: 1600CE; 25,000,000: 1650CE; 29,000,000: 1700CE; 29,000,000: 1750CE; 28,000,000: 1800CE; 32,000,000: 1850; Population estimate by McEvedy and Jones based on census data chosen to code as it provides figures for the duration of the polity.
[2]
26,065,425: 1721CE; 26,921,816: 1732CE; 26,153,450: 1744CE; 26,061,830: 1756CE; 26,010,600: 1780CE; 24,891,441: 1792CE; 25,517,729: 1804CE; 27,201,400: 1828CE; 27,063,907: 1834; 26,907,625: 1846; Based on census data summarized by (Totman 1993).
[3]
15,000,000-17,000,000: 1600CE population estimate by Farris
[4]
.
[1]: Deal, William E. 2005. Handbook to Life in Medieval and Early Modern Japan. Oxford University Press.p.63. [2]: McEvedy, C and Jones, R. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books. London.p.181 [3]: Totman, Conrad. 1993. Early Modern Japan. University of California Press. Berkeley; London.p.251. [4]: Farris, William Wayne. 2006. Japan’s Medieval Population: Famine, Fertility, and Warfare in a Transformative Age. University of Hawaii Press.p.212. |
||||||
|
During this period population census were carried out ‘However, the accuracy of such statistics varies greatly, as the surveys often neglected different demographics like members of the samurai household, children, and others’.
[1]
A number of scholars have used various methods based on the census and other data to provide estimates that more accurately reflect the actual population. 22,000,000: 1600CE; 25,000,000: 1650CE; 29,000,000: 1700CE; 29,000,000: 1750CE; 28,000,000: 1800CE; 32,000,000: 1850; Population estimate by McEvedy and Jones based on census data chosen to code as it provides figures for the duration of the polity.
[2]
26,065,425: 1721CE; 26,921,816: 1732CE; 26,153,450: 1744CE; 26,061,830: 1756CE; 26,010,600: 1780CE; 24,891,441: 1792CE; 25,517,729: 1804CE; 27,201,400: 1828CE; 27,063,907: 1834; 26,907,625: 1846; Based on census data summarized by (Totman 1993).
[3]
15,000,000-17,000,000: 1600CE population estimate by Farris
[4]
.
[1]: Deal, William E. 2005. Handbook to Life in Medieval and Early Modern Japan. Oxford University Press.p.63. [2]: McEvedy, C and Jones, R. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books. London.p.181 [3]: Totman, Conrad. 1993. Early Modern Japan. University of California Press. Berkeley; London.p.251. [4]: Farris, William Wayne. 2006. Japan’s Medieval Population: Famine, Fertility, and Warfare in a Transformative Age. University of Hawaii Press.p.212. |
||||||
| 224 | Russian Empire, Romanov Dynasty I | [11,000,000 to 15,500,000] people | Confident Expert | 1678 CE 1720 CE | ||
|
In 1678, a census in Russia recorded approximately 950,000 households. Population estimates based on this census range between 10.5 and 11.5 million. These estimates vary depending on the assumed average number of individuals per household and the proportion of the population that may have been uncounted in the census.
[1]
1720 : includes new Baltic & Polish territories [2] [1]: N. A. Gorskai︠a︡, Istoricheskai︠a︡ Demografii︠a︡ Rossii Ėpokhi Feodalizma: Itogi i Problemy Izuchenii︠a︡ (Moskva: Nauka, 1994). Zotero link: 93M4X65C [2]: Brian Catchpole, A Map History of Russia (London: Heinemann Educational, 1974). Zotero link: FLZC48SZ |
||||||
|
21,800,000: 1685 CE; 23,400,000: 1715 CE; 25,300,000: 1745 CE; 28,500,000: 1789 CE
[1]
17th-18th century France: 20 million [2] Famine 1661 CE. [3] Famine 1693-1694 CE. Perhaps 2 million died. [4] Famine 1709 CE. [3] 1720-1760 CE period of economic and population growth. [5] [1]: (Ladurie 1991, 302) [2]: (Chartrand 2013) [3]: (Ladurie 1991, 336) [4]: (Ladurie 1991, 216) [5]: (Briggs 1998, 158) |
||||||
|
People. AD: Estimates given at century marks. Real code is: 10,000: 1673 CE; 300: 1832 CE "In 1673, the Illinois were a large, powerful group of tribes that numbered more than 10,000 people and occupied a vast territory. However, in 1832, when they ceded the last of their Illinois lands to the United States, they had been reduced, in the State of Illinois, to a single village of fewer than 300 people"
[1]
[1]: Illinois State Museum, The Illinois, History: The Illinois Decline (2000), http://www.museum.state.il.us/muslink/nat_amer/post/htmls/hi_decline.html |
||||||
|
The estimated populations of the British Isles and British colonies in the west was 5,470,000 in 1700.
[1]
The entire population of the British Empire was estimated to be over 61 million in 1811.
[2]
[1]: (Marshall 2006: 100. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/HGG2PPQQ. [2]: (Colquhoun 1811: 47) Colquhoun, Patrik. 1814. Treatise on the Wealth, Power and Resources of the British Empire in Every Quarter of the World Etc. Jos. Mawman. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/3SNZA6FJ |
||||||
|
During this period population census were carried out ‘However, the accuracy of such statistics varies greatly, as the surveys often neglected different demographics like members of the samurai household, children, and others’.
[1]
A number of scholars have used various methods based on the census and other data to provide estimates that more accurately reflect the actual population. 22,000,000: 1600CE; 25,000,000: 1650CE; 29,000,000: 1700CE; 29,000,000: 1750CE; 28,000,000: 1800CE; 32,000,000: 1850; Population estimate by McEvedy and Jones based on census data chosen to code as it provides figures for the duration of the polity.
[2]
26,065,425: 1721CE; 26,921,816: 1732CE; 26,153,450: 1744CE; 26,061,830: 1756CE; 26,010,600: 1780CE; 24,891,441: 1792CE; 25,517,729: 1804CE; 27,201,400: 1828CE; 27,063,907: 1834; 26,907,625: 1846; Based on census data summarized by (Totman 1993).
[3]
15,000,000-17,000,000: 1600CE population estimate by Farris
[4]
.
[1]: Deal, William E. 2005. Handbook to Life in Medieval and Early Modern Japan. Oxford University Press.p.63. [2]: McEvedy, C and Jones, R. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books. London.p.181 [3]: Totman, Conrad. 1993. Early Modern Japan. University of California Press. Berkeley; London.p.251. [4]: Farris, William Wayne. 2006. Japan’s Medieval Population: Famine, Fertility, and Warfare in a Transformative Age. University of Hawaii Press.p.212. |
||||||
|
People.
Populations of Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Tadzikhistan, Kirghizstan [1] : 1600 CE: 4 million people 1700 CE: 4.5 million people AD: The Khanate of Bukhara would only represent a small portion of that estimate, perhaps 1/5th of the population.Considering that this is an estimate based on an estimate (!) it should be double-checked by an expert.However a rough population number for the Bukhara Khanate could be comprised between 500,000 and 1.2 million people in 1600 CE and between 600,000 and 1.4 million people in 1700 CE. (arbitrary estimates, RA’s guess!) [1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 164) |
||||||
|
These figure are from Gross.
[1]
Although Beloch provides figures for individual cities in the Papal State for the period 1500-1800, he does not tally up the figures for a composite total.
[2]
Precise information for population totals on Lazio for this period would only be obtainable by doing archival research in the various collections of the Vatican. Marino has estimated that there were about 13.3 Italians on the peninsula as a whole around 1600.
[3]
[1]: Gross, 60 [2]: Bairoch, 185-241 [3]: Marino, 57 |
||||||
|
People
143,411,559: 1741 CE; 159,801,551: 1742 CE; 164,454,416: 1743 CE; 166,808,604: 1744 CE; 169,922,127: 1745 CE; 171,896,773: 1746 CE; 171,896,773: 1747CE; 177,495,039: 1748 CE; {177,495,039; 177,538,796}: 1749CE; 179,538,540: 1750 CE; 181,811,359: 1751 CE; 182,857,277: 1752 CE; 183,678,259: 1753 CE; 184,504,493: 1754 CE; 185,612,881: 1755 CE; 186,615,514: 1756 CE; 190,348,328: 1757 CE; 191,672,808: 1758 CE; 194,791,859: 1759 CE; 196,837,977: 1760 CE; {198,214,555; 198,214,553}: 1761 CE; {200,472,461; 201,013,344}: 1762 CE; 204,299,828: 1763 CE; 205,591,017: 1764 CE; 206,993,224: 1765 CE; 208,095,796: 1766 CE; {209,839,546; 209,749,547}: 1767 CE; 210,837,502: 1768 CE; 212,023,042: 1769 CE; 213,613,163: 1770 CE; {214,600,356; 214,647,251}: 1771 CE; 216,467,258: 1772 CE; 218,743,315: 1773 CE; 221,027,224: 1774 CE; 264,561,355: 1775 CE; {268,238,181; 268,238,182}: 1776 CE; 270,863,760: 1777 CE; 242,965,618: 1778 CE; 275,042,916: 1779 CE; 277,554,431: 1780 CE; 279,816,070: 1781 CE; 281,822,675: 1782 CE; {284,033,785; 284,033,805}: 1783 CE; 286,331,307: 1784 CE; 288,863,974: 1785 CE; 291,102,486: 1786 CE; 292,429,018: 1787 CE; {294,852,089; 294,852,189}: 1788 CE; 297,717,496: 1789 CE; {301,487,115; 301,487,114}: 1790 CE; {304,354,110; 304,354,160}: 1791 CE; 307,467,279: 1792 CE; 310,497,210: 1793 CE; {313,281,795; 313,281,295}: 1794 CE; 296,968,968: 1795 CE; 275,662,044: 1796 CE [1] "300 million in 1795" [2] [1]: (姜涛, 1990) [2]: (Lorge 2015, 182) |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
People. “Abomey, an expansive community settled around a marketplace and a series of royal palace compounds, emerged as greater Dahomey’s political capital and home to as many as 30,000 in the 18th century. Nearby Cana also became a significant center on the plateau in this period. It was a major node in regional administration and interregional trade routes, with significant regional markets and as many as 15,000 inhabitants in the 18th century. Historical population estimates suggest 21 to 33 percent of the plateau’s population lived at Abomey and Cana.”
[1]
“On the eve of European penetration the Dahomey kingdom stretched from the important coastal ports of Whydah and Cotonou to the eighth parallel, excluding Savé and Savalou. […] The Dahomey kingdom thus stretched almost two hundred miles from north to south , and one hundred miles from east to west. Its population has been estimated roughly at two hundred thousand.”
[2]
[1]: Monroe, J. C. (2011). Urbanism on West Africa’s Slave Coast: Archaeology sheds new light on cities in the era of the Atlantic slave trade. American Scientist, 99(5), 400–409: 406. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/E5WA63Z2/collection [2]: Lombard, J. (1976). The Kingdom of Dahomey. In West African Kingdoms in the Nineteenth Century (Repr, pp. 70–92). Published for the International African Institute by Oxford University Press: 70. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/T6WTVSHZ/collection |
||||||
|
21,800,000: 1685 CE; 23,400,000: 1715 CE; 25,300,000: 1745 CE; 28,500,000: 1789 CE
[1]
17th-18th century France: 20 million [2] Famine 1661 CE. [3] Famine 1693-1694 CE. Perhaps 2 million died. [4] Famine 1709 CE. [3] 1720-1760 CE period of economic and population growth. [5] [1]: (Ladurie 1991, 302) [2]: (Chartrand 2013) [3]: (Ladurie 1991, 336) [4]: (Ladurie 1991, 216) [5]: (Briggs 1998, 158) |
||||||
|
21,800,000: 1685 CE; 23,400,000: 1715 CE; 25,300,000: 1745 CE; 28,500,000: 1789 CE
[1]
17th-18th century France: 20 million [2] Famine 1661 CE. [3] Famine 1693-1694 CE. Perhaps 2 million died. [4] Famine 1709 CE. [3] 1720-1760 CE period of economic and population growth. [5] [1]: (Ladurie 1991, 302) [2]: (Chartrand 2013) [3]: (Ladurie 1991, 336) [4]: (Ladurie 1991, 216) [5]: (Briggs 1998, 158) |
||||||
|
During this period population census were carried out ‘However, the accuracy of such statistics varies greatly, as the surveys often neglected different demographics like members of the samurai household, children, and others’.
[1]
A number of scholars have used various methods based on the census and other data to provide estimates that more accurately reflect the actual population. 22,000,000: 1600CE; 25,000,000: 1650CE; 29,000,000: 1700CE; 29,000,000: 1750CE; 28,000,000: 1800CE; 32,000,000: 1850; Population estimate by McEvedy and Jones based on census data chosen to code as it provides figures for the duration of the polity.
[2]
26,065,425: 1721CE; 26,921,816: 1732CE; 26,153,450: 1744CE; 26,061,830: 1756CE; 26,010,600: 1780CE; 24,891,441: 1792CE; 25,517,729: 1804CE; 27,201,400: 1828CE; 27,063,907: 1834; 26,907,625: 1846; Based on census data summarized by (Totman 1993).
[3]
15,000,000-17,000,000: 1600CE population estimate by Farris
[4]
.
[1]: Deal, William E. 2005. Handbook to Life in Medieval and Early Modern Japan. Oxford University Press.p.63. [2]: McEvedy, C and Jones, R. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books. London.p.181 [3]: Totman, Conrad. 1993. Early Modern Japan. University of California Press. Berkeley; London.p.251. [4]: Farris, William Wayne. 2006. Japan’s Medieval Population: Famine, Fertility, and Warfare in a Transformative Age. University of Hawaii Press.p.212. |
||||||
|
The total population of Spain and Spanish held lands in 1787 is estimated at around 10,318,000 inhabitants.”(Casey 2002: 21) Casey, James. 2002. Early Modern Spain: A Social History. New York: Routledge. https://www.zotero.org/groups/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/2SNTRSWT
|
||||||
|
21,800,000: 1685 CE; 23,400,000: 1715 CE; 25,300,000: 1745 CE; 28,500,000: 1789 CE
[1]
17th-18th century France: 20 million [2] Famine 1661 CE. [3] Famine 1693-1694 CE. Perhaps 2 million died. [4] Famine 1709 CE. [3] 1720-1760 CE period of economic and population growth. [5] [1]: (Ladurie 1991, 302) [2]: (Chartrand 2013) [3]: (Ladurie 1991, 336) [4]: (Ladurie 1991, 216) [5]: (Briggs 1998, 158) |
||||||
|
“At Leopold’s death [1790], the monarchy’s population of 26 million people made it the second largest in Europe. Hungary accounted for nearly half that total, with the Bohemian crownlands and the Austrian territories adding another 20 percent each.”
[1]
“In the immediate aftermath of the Napoleonic Wars, Imperial Austria counted some 30 million people inside its new borders. During the next thirty years the population grew rapidly at an annual rate of at least 1 percent as increased agricultural productivity especially in the Hereditary Lands and Bohemia made it possible to feed an expanding population.”
[2]
“This robust economic growth was unavoidably attended by important social changes. The population increased significantly, with the monarchy reaching a total of nearly 34 million inhabitants by 1848.”
[3]
[1]: (Curtis 2013: 244) Curtis, Benjamin. 2013. The Habsburgs: The History of a Dynasty. London; New York: Bloomsbury. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/TRKUBP92 [2]: (Judson 2016: 112) Judson, Pieter M. 2016. The Habsburg Empire: A New History. Cambridge, USA; London, England: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/BN5TQZBW [3]: (Curtis 2013: 257) Curtis, Benjamin. 2013. The Habsburgs: The History of a Dynasty. London; New York: Bloomsbury. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/TRKUBP92 |
||||||
|
During this period population census were carried out ‘However, the accuracy of such statistics varies greatly, as the surveys often neglected different demographics like members of the samurai household, children, and others’.
[1]
A number of scholars have used various methods based on the census and other data to provide estimates that more accurately reflect the actual population. 22,000,000: 1600CE; 25,000,000: 1650CE; 29,000,000: 1700CE; 29,000,000: 1750CE; 28,000,000: 1800CE; 32,000,000: 1850; Population estimate by McEvedy and Jones based on census data chosen to code as it provides figures for the duration of the polity.
[2]
26,065,425: 1721CE; 26,921,816: 1732CE; 26,153,450: 1744CE; 26,061,830: 1756CE; 26,010,600: 1780CE; 24,891,441: 1792CE; 25,517,729: 1804CE; 27,201,400: 1828CE; 27,063,907: 1834; 26,907,625: 1846; Based on census data summarized by (Totman 1993).
[3]
15,000,000-17,000,000: 1600CE population estimate by Farris
[4]
.
[1]: Deal, William E. 2005. Handbook to Life in Medieval and Early Modern Japan. Oxford University Press.p.63. [2]: McEvedy, C and Jones, R. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books. London.p.181 [3]: Totman, Conrad. 1993. Early Modern Japan. University of California Press. Berkeley; London.p.251. [4]: Farris, William Wayne. 2006. Japan’s Medieval Population: Famine, Fertility, and Warfare in a Transformative Age. University of Hawaii Press.p.212. |
||||||
|
People
Later Qing has population over 300 million according to The Cambridge History of China [1] 1812 CE: 361,695,492 people: The census was interrupted due to nature disasters, scattered rebellions, and White Lotus Rebellion occurred in 1794-1804 among impoverished settlers in the mountainous region that separates Sichuan province from Hubei and Shaanxi provinces. 1833 CE: 398,942,036 people: [2] 1852 CE: 334,403,035 people: (1) [3] (2) The census was interrupted due to the outbreak of Nian Rebellion taking place in northern China from 1851 to 1868, and Taiping Rebellion (1851-1864) in South China. 1912 CE: 347,902,562 people: The census was conducted since 1910 and completed in 1912. [4] Other figures: [5] Po-Ju Tuan coded the following estimates--they have been moved to the description field in case this level of detail is useful in the future: 275,662,044: 1796 CE; 271,333,544: 1797 CE; 290,982,980: 1798 CE; 293,283,179: 1799 CE; 295,237,311: 1800 CE; 297,501,548: 1801 CE; 299,749,770: 1802 CE; 302,250,673: 1803 CE; 304,461,284: 1804 CE; 332,181,403: 1805 CE; 335,369,469: 1806 CE; 338,062,439: 1807 CE; 350,291,724: 1808 CE; 352,900,024: 1809 CE; 345,717,214: 1810 CE; 358,610,039: 1811 CE; {333,700,560; 361,695,492; 363,695,492}: 1812 CE; 336,451,672: 1813 CE; 316,574,895: 1814 CE; 326,574,895: 1815 CE; 328,814,957: 1816 CE; 331,330,433: 1817 CE; {301,260,545; 371,580,173}: 1819 CE; {353,377,694; 373,773,394; 383,100,000}: 1820 CE; 355,540,258: 1821 CE; 372,457,539: 1822 CE; {375,153,122; 380,619,569}: 1823 CE; {374,601,132; 382,439,631}: 1824 CE; {379,885,340; 387,026,888}: 1825 CE; {380,287,007; 386,081,958}: 1826 CE; {383,696,095; 388,608,215}: 1827 CE; {386,531,513; 390,755,718}: 1828 CE; 390,500,650: 1829 CE; 394,784,681: 1830 CE; 395,821,092: 1831 CE; 397,132,659: 1832 CE; 398,942,036: 1833 CE; 401,008,574: 1834 CE; {401,767,053; 403,052,086}: 1835 CE; 404,901,448: 1836 CE; {405 923 174; 406 984 114}: 1837 CE; 409,038,799: 1838 CE; 410,850,639: 1839 CE; 412,814,828: 1840 CE; 413,457,311: 1841 CE; {414,686,994; 416,118,189}: 1842 CE; 417,239,097: 1843 CE; 419,441,336: 1844 CE; 421,342,730: 1845 CE; 423,121,129: 1846 CE; {424,938,009; 425,106,201}: 1847 CE; {426,737,016; 426,928,854}: 1848 CE; {412,986,649; 428,420,667}: 1849 CE; {414,493,899; 429,931,034}: 1850 CE; {432,164,047; 431,894,047}: 1851 CE; 334,403,035: 1852 CE; 347,902,565: 1920 CE. [1]: (Fairbank, 1978, 8) [2]: (梁方仲, 1985, 10) [3]: (姜公韜 & 傅樂成, 1988, 122) [4]: (梁方仲, 1985) [5]: (姜涛, 1990) |
||||||
|
People. "Evidence for the size and distribution of the population before the first census in 1911 is sparse and far from reliable. Estimates for the 1800-20 period vary from 1 to 3 million (Skinner, 1957:79; Sternstein, 1993:18). A detailed examination of the evidence by Sternstein (1965:1984) suggests very gradual growth from the 1780s to reach a population a little short of 5 million by the middle of the nineteenth century."
[1]
It is not clear whether this estimate covers tributary states.
[1]: (Dixon 2002, p. xxxii) |
||||||
|
People. AD: Estimates given at century marks. Real code is: 10,000: 1673 CE; 300: 1832 CE "In 1673, the Illinois were a large, powerful group of tribes that numbered more than 10,000 people and occupied a vast territory. However, in 1832, when they ceded the last of their Illinois lands to the United States, they had been reduced, in the State of Illinois, to a single village of fewer than 300 people"
[1]
[1]: Illinois State Museum, The Illinois, History: The Illinois Decline (2000), http://www.museum.state.il.us/muslink/nat_amer/post/htmls/hi_decline.html |
||||||
|
By the time of Capt. Cook’s arrival there in 1779, Kalani’ōpu’u’s kingdom (the entire Big Island plus the Hana district of Maui) had at least 60,000 people, and possibly as many as 150,000 people
[1]
. Kirch (2010: 33) gives as a high figure 150,000 (based on estimates by Lt. King on Cook’s voyage), and a low of 120,000 based on Emory, in Schmitt (1968, Table 6) (This included the kingdom’s foothold in eastern Maui.) In 1778, the population of entire archipelago was 250,000 or more
[2]
, so the population of the entire archipelago at the time of Kamehameha’s unification in 1810 was probably somewhat less than this, given outbreaks of disease as well as a considerable number killed in the wars. Given a fairly credible estimate of 142,050 people in the entire archipelago in 1823
[3]
, 180,000 is a reasonable estimate for 1810.
[1]: Kirch, P. V. 2000. On the Road of the Winds: An Archaeological History of the Pacific Islands Before European Contact. Berkeley: University of California Press. Pg. 248. [2]: Kirch, P. V. 1985. Feathered Gods and Fishhooks: An Introduction to Hawaiian Archaeology and Prehistory. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. Pg. 286. [3]: Kuykendall, Ralph S. 1968[1938]. The Hawaiian Kingdom, Volume 1: 1778-1854, Foundation and Transformation. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. Pg. 336. |
||||||
|
These figure are from Gross.
[1]
Although Beloch provides figures for individual cities in the Papal State for the period 1500-1800, he does not tally up the figures for a composite total.
[2]
Precise information for population totals on Lazio for this period would only be obtainable by doing archival research in the various collections of the Vatican. Marino has estimated that there were about 13.3 Italians on the peninsula as a whole around 1600.
[3]
[1]: Gross, 60 [2]: Bairoch, 185-241 [3]: Marino, 57 |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
| 250 | Russian Empire, Romanov Dynasty II | [35,500,000 to 74,100,000] people | Confident Expert | 1800 CE 1860 CE | ||
|
The first and only comprehensive census of the Russian Empire was conducted in 1897.
[1]
The census recorded demographic data such as social class, native language, religion, and profession, providing insights into the Empire’s composition. Estimates for the years: 1800, 1860, 1913 [2] [1]: “Демоскоп Weekly - Приложение. Справочник Статистических Показателей.,” accessed December 2. Zotero link: 8582PW6D [2]: M. E. Falkus, The Industrialisation of Russia, 1700–1914 (London: Macmillan Education UK, 1972). Zotero link: ZGJVXPBV |
||||||
|
People. “Abomey, an expansive community settled around a marketplace and a series of royal palace compounds, emerged as greater Dahomey’s political capital and home to as many as 30,000 in the 18th century. Nearby Cana also became a significant center on the plateau in this period. It was a major node in regional administration and interregional trade routes, with significant regional markets and as many as 15,000 inhabitants in the 18th century. Historical population estimates suggest 21 to 33 percent of the plateau’s population lived at Abomey and Cana.”
[1]
“On the eve of European penetration the Dahomey kingdom stretched from the important coastal ports of Whydah and Cotonou to the eighth parallel, excluding Savé and Savalou. […] The Dahomey kingdom thus stretched almost two hundred miles from north to south , and one hundred miles from east to west. Its population has been estimated roughly at two hundred thousand.”
[2]
[1]: Monroe, J. C. (2011). Urbanism on West Africa’s Slave Coast: Archaeology sheds new light on cities in the era of the Atlantic slave trade. American Scientist, 99(5), 400–409: 406. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/E5WA63Z2/collection [2]: Lombard, J. (1976). The Kingdom of Dahomey. In West African Kingdoms in the Nineteenth Century (Repr, pp. 70–92). Published for the International African Institute by Oxford University Press: 70. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/T6WTVSHZ/collection |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
People.
The population of Iran was between six and ten million during the nineteenth century. It was composed mainly of peasants, but between a quarter and a third of the people were tribal, and roughly 10-20 per cent lived in cities." [1] [1]: (Martin 2005, 15) Vanessa Martin. 2005. The Qajar Pact: Bargaining, Protest and the State in Nineteenth-Century Persia. I. B. Tauris. London. |
||||||
|
The estimated populations of the British Isles and British colonies in the west was 5,470,000 in 1700.
[1]
The entire population of the British Empire was estimated to be over 61 million in 1811.
[2]
[1]: (Marshall 2006: 100. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/HGG2PPQQ. [2]: (Colquhoun 1811: 47) Colquhoun, Patrik. 1814. Treatise on the Wealth, Power and Resources of the British Empire in Every Quarter of the World Etc. Jos. Mawman. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/3SNZA6FJ |
||||||
|
People. Maddison Project Estimates
[1]
Alternate estimates: In 1877 CE? according to contemporary literature: Area: 8,754,793 square miles. Population: 284,110,693. [2] According to statistician Patrick Colquhoun, the total population of the Empire in 1814 was 61.15 Million. A Treatise on the Wealth, Power and Resources of the British Empire 398.4 million in 1901 [3] [1]: https://www.rug.nl/ggdc/historicaldevelopment/maddison/releases/maddison-project-database-2018 [2]: (Bartholomew 1877, v) John Bartholomew. 1877. Atlas of the British empire throughout the world. George Philip and Son. London. [3]: Census of the British Empire, 1901: Report with Summary and Detailed Tables for the Several Colonies, &c. London: His Majesty’s Stationery Office, 1906. |
||||||
|
“At Leopold’s death [1790], the monarchy’s population of 26 million people made it the second largest in Europe. Hungary accounted for nearly half that total, with the Bohemian crownlands and the Austrian territories adding another 20 percent each.”
[1]
“In the immediate aftermath of the Napoleonic Wars, Imperial Austria counted some 30 million people inside its new borders. During the next thirty years the population grew rapidly at an annual rate of at least 1 percent as increased agricultural productivity especially in the Hereditary Lands and Bohemia made it possible to feed an expanding population.”
[2]
“This robust economic growth was unavoidably attended by important social changes. The population increased significantly, with the monarchy reaching a total of nearly 34 million inhabitants by 1848.”
[3]
[1]: (Curtis 2013: 244) Curtis, Benjamin. 2013. The Habsburgs: The History of a Dynasty. London; New York: Bloomsbury. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/TRKUBP92 [2]: (Judson 2016: 112) Judson, Pieter M. 2016. The Habsburg Empire: A New History. Cambridge, USA; London, England: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/BN5TQZBW [3]: (Curtis 2013: 257) Curtis, Benjamin. 2013. The Habsburgs: The History of a Dynasty. London; New York: Bloomsbury. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/TRKUBP92 |
||||||
|
People. The population of France grew from 30.5million in 1821 to 35.4 million in 1846. Birth rates had slowed considerably over the mid-nineteenth century and by 1870 the population had only risen to around 36million.
[1]
[2]
[1]: Clapham 1955: 159. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/2QKQJQM3. [2]: Crook 2002: 134, 211. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/29D9EQQE |
||||||
|
People. The population of France grew from 30.5million in 1821 to 35.4 million in 1846. Birth rates had slowed considerably over the mid-nineteenth century and by 1870 the population had only risen to around 36million.
[1]
[2]
[1]: Clapham 1955: 159. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/2QKQJQM3. [2]: Crook 2002: 134, 211. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/29D9EQQE |
||||||
|
“At Leopold’s death [1790], the monarchy’s population of 26 million people made it the second largest in Europe. Hungary accounted for nearly half that total, with the Bohemian crownlands and the Austrian territories adding another 20 percent each.”
[1]
“In the immediate aftermath of the Napoleonic Wars, Imperial Austria counted some 30 million people inside its new borders. During the next thirty years the population grew rapidly at an annual rate of at least 1 percent as increased agricultural productivity especially in the Hereditary Lands and Bohemia made it possible to feed an expanding population.”
[2]
“This robust economic growth was unavoidably attended by important social changes. The population increased significantly, with the monarchy reaching a total of nearly 34 million inhabitants by 1848.”
[3]
[1]: (Curtis 2013: 244) Curtis, Benjamin. 2013. The Habsburgs: The History of a Dynasty. London; New York: Bloomsbury. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/TRKUBP92 [2]: (Judson 2016: 112) Judson, Pieter M. 2016. The Habsburg Empire: A New History. Cambridge, USA; London, England: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/BN5TQZBW [3]: (Curtis 2013: 257) Curtis, Benjamin. 2013. The Habsburgs: The History of a Dynasty. London; New York: Bloomsbury. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/TRKUBP92 |
||||||
|
People. "Evidence for the size and distribution of the population before the first census in 1911 is sparse and far from reliable. Estimates for the 1800-20 period vary from 1 to 3 million (Skinner, 1957:79; Sternstein, 1993:18). A detailed examination of the evidence by Sternstein (1965:1984) suggests very gradual growth from the 1780s to reach a population a little short of 5 million by the middle of the nineteenth century."
[1]
It is not clear whether this estimate covers tributary states.
[1]: (Dixon 2002, p. xxxii) |
||||||
|
During this period population census were carried out ‘However, the accuracy of such statistics varies greatly, as the surveys often neglected different demographics like members of the samurai household, children, and others’.
[1]
A number of scholars have used various methods based on the census and other data to provide estimates that more accurately reflect the actual population. 22,000,000: 1600CE; 25,000,000: 1650CE; 29,000,000: 1700CE; 29,000,000: 1750CE; 28,000,000: 1800CE; 32,000,000: 1850; Population estimate by McEvedy and Jones based on census data chosen to code as it provides figures for the duration of the polity.
[2]
26,065,425: 1721CE; 26,921,816: 1732CE; 26,153,450: 1744CE; 26,061,830: 1756CE; 26,010,600: 1780CE; 24,891,441: 1792CE; 25,517,729: 1804CE; 27,201,400: 1828CE; 27,063,907: 1834; 26,907,625: 1846; Based on census data summarized by (Totman 1993).
[3]
15,000,000-17,000,000: 1600CE population estimate by Farris
[4]
.
[1]: Deal, William E. 2005. Handbook to Life in Medieval and Early Modern Japan. Oxford University Press.p.63. [2]: McEvedy, C and Jones, R. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books. London.p.181 [3]: Totman, Conrad. 1993. Early Modern Japan. University of California Press. Berkeley; London.p.251. [4]: Farris, William Wayne. 2006. Japan’s Medieval Population: Famine, Fertility, and Warfare in a Transformative Age. University of Hawaii Press.p.212. |
||||||
|
People. “During the reigns of the last two Kamehamehas there were three censuses, in 1860, 1866, and 1872. Summarized in the table below [reflected in above coding], they show the trend of population. It is believed that Hawaii’s total population reached its lowest point about 1875 or 1876. Before the next census year, 1878, it began the long upward climb that continued for many decades. But the Hawaiian and part-Hawaiian group did not get to its lowest point until long after 1878.”
[1]
While the population of Caucasian, Chinese and ‘Other’ inhabitants grew significantly during 1860-1872, the population of Hawaiians fell from 66,984 in 1860 to 51,531 in 1872.
[2]
[1]: (Kuykendall 1938: 177-178) Kuykendall, Ralph Simpson. 1938. The Hawaiian Kingdom. Honolulu: University Press of Hawaii. http://archive.org/details/hawaiiankingdom0002kuyk. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/QJ4Z7AAB [2]: (Kuykendall 1938: 177) Kuykendall, Ralph Simpson. 1938. The Hawaiian Kingdom. Honolulu: University Press of Hawaii. http://archive.org/details/hawaiiankingdom0002kuyk. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/QJ4Z7AAB |
||||||
| 266 | Russian Empire, Romanov Dynasty II | [74,100,000 to 125,640,021] people | Confident Expert | 1860 CE 1897 CE | ||
|
The first and only comprehensive census of the Russian Empire was conducted in 1897.
[1]
The census recorded demographic data such as social class, native language, religion, and profession, providing insights into the Empire’s composition. Estimates for the years: 1800, 1860, 1913 [2] [1]: “Демоскоп Weekly - Приложение. Справочник Статистических Показателей.,” accessed December 2. Zotero link: 8582PW6D [2]: M. E. Falkus, The Industrialisation of Russia, 1700–1914 (London: Macmillan Education UK, 1972). Zotero link: ZGJVXPBV |
||||||
|
People. The population of France grew from 30.5million in 1821 to 35.4 million in 1846. Birth rates had slowed considerably over the mid-nineteenth century and by 1870 the population had only risen to around 36million.
[1]
[2]
[1]: Clapham 1955: 159. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/2QKQJQM3. [2]: Crook 2002: 134, 211. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/29D9EQQE |
||||||
|
People. “During the reigns of the last two Kamehamehas there were three censuses, in 1860, 1866, and 1872. Summarized in the table below [reflected in above coding], they show the trend of population. It is believed that Hawaii’s total population reached its lowest point about 1875 or 1876. Before the next census year, 1878, it began the long upward climb that continued for many decades. But the Hawaiian and part-Hawaiian group did not get to its lowest point until long after 1878.”
[1]
While the population of Caucasian, Chinese and ‘Other’ inhabitants grew significantly during 1860-1872, the population of Hawaiians fell from 66,984 in 1860 to 51,531 in 1872.
[2]
[1]: (Kuykendall 1938: 177-178) Kuykendall, Ralph Simpson. 1938. The Hawaiian Kingdom. Honolulu: University Press of Hawaii. http://archive.org/details/hawaiiankingdom0002kuyk. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/QJ4Z7AAB [2]: (Kuykendall 1938: 177) Kuykendall, Ralph Simpson. 1938. The Hawaiian Kingdom. Honolulu: University Press of Hawaii. http://archive.org/details/hawaiiankingdom0002kuyk. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/QJ4Z7AAB |
||||||
| 275 | Russian Empire, Romanov Dynasty II | [125,640,021 to 170,100,000] people | Confident Expert | 1897 CE 1913 CE | ||
|
-
|
||||||
|
People
Later Qing has population over 300 million according to The Cambridge History of China [1] 1812 CE: 361,695,492 people: The census was interrupted due to nature disasters, scattered rebellions, and White Lotus Rebellion occurred in 1794-1804 among impoverished settlers in the mountainous region that separates Sichuan province from Hubei and Shaanxi provinces. 1833 CE: 398,942,036 people: [2] 1852 CE: 334,403,035 people: (1) [3] (2) The census was interrupted due to the outbreak of Nian Rebellion taking place in northern China from 1851 to 1868, and Taiping Rebellion (1851-1864) in South China. 1912 CE: 347,902,562 people: The census was conducted since 1910 and completed in 1912. [4] Other figures: [5] Po-Ju Tuan coded the following estimates--they have been moved to the description field in case this level of detail is useful in the future: 275,662,044: 1796 CE; 271,333,544: 1797 CE; 290,982,980: 1798 CE; 293,283,179: 1799 CE; 295,237,311: 1800 CE; 297,501,548: 1801 CE; 299,749,770: 1802 CE; 302,250,673: 1803 CE; 304,461,284: 1804 CE; 332,181,403: 1805 CE; 335,369,469: 1806 CE; 338,062,439: 1807 CE; 350,291,724: 1808 CE; 352,900,024: 1809 CE; 345,717,214: 1810 CE; 358,610,039: 1811 CE; {333,700,560; 361,695,492; 363,695,492}: 1812 CE; 336,451,672: 1813 CE; 316,574,895: 1814 CE; 326,574,895: 1815 CE; 328,814,957: 1816 CE; 331,330,433: 1817 CE; {301,260,545; 371,580,173}: 1819 CE; {353,377,694; 373,773,394; 383,100,000}: 1820 CE; 355,540,258: 1821 CE; 372,457,539: 1822 CE; {375,153,122; 380,619,569}: 1823 CE; {374,601,132; 382,439,631}: 1824 CE; {379,885,340; 387,026,888}: 1825 CE; {380,287,007; 386,081,958}: 1826 CE; {383,696,095; 388,608,215}: 1827 CE; {386,531,513; 390,755,718}: 1828 CE; 390,500,650: 1829 CE; 394,784,681: 1830 CE; 395,821,092: 1831 CE; 397,132,659: 1832 CE; 398,942,036: 1833 CE; 401,008,574: 1834 CE; {401,767,053; 403,052,086}: 1835 CE; 404,901,448: 1836 CE; {405 923 174; 406 984 114}: 1837 CE; 409,038,799: 1838 CE; 410,850,639: 1839 CE; 412,814,828: 1840 CE; 413,457,311: 1841 CE; {414,686,994; 416,118,189}: 1842 CE; 417,239,097: 1843 CE; 419,441,336: 1844 CE; 421,342,730: 1845 CE; 423,121,129: 1846 CE; {424,938,009; 425,106,201}: 1847 CE; {426,737,016; 426,928,854}: 1848 CE; {412,986,649; 428,420,667}: 1849 CE; {414,493,899; 429,931,034}: 1850 CE; {432,164,047; 431,894,047}: 1851 CE; 334,403,035: 1852 CE; 347,902,565: 1920 CE. [1]: (Fairbank, 1978, 8) [2]: (梁方仲, 1985, 10) [3]: (姜公韜 & 傅樂成, 1988, 122) [4]: (梁方仲, 1985) [5]: (姜涛, 1990) |
||||||
|
People. 1872 CE: 80,000; 1901 CE: 138,274; 1951 CE: 242,075 Regional integration was an artefact of colonial rule and the superimposition of a colonial administration upon a native system: ‘The Garo Hills were sparsely populated at the time the British came. According to Hunter, population of the Garo Hills was 80,000 in 1872; there was hardly any immigration and the hills were mostly populated by the Garos. Population went on increasing rapidly after that. In 1901 Garos were 74% of total population. It became 78% in 1951 and 85% in 1961 and 78.81% in 1971. High rate of growth of population is mainly due to population influx. What is of interest is, considerable influx of Garo population which is evident from the increasing proportion of the Garos in the total population.’
[1]
‘We find an increase of the population of the Garo between 1901 and 1951, 84% and between 1951 and 1961, 39%; while the percentages of general population increase for the periods were 61 and 26 respectively. Thus it is clear that the Garo population of the district is increasing at a faster rate as compared to the general population. This is due probably to the reason that many Garo families have migrated to the district from the adjoining Garo areas in the plains, while there was no such influx of non-Garo families, rather a number of their families have moved out of the district for various reasons. We can expect a greater percentage of increase during the period 1961-1971, because there was an influx of a large number of Garo families from East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) during the first half of this decade.’
[2]
‘The population of the district according to the 1951 census was 242,075, of which 190,901 gave Garo as their mother tongue. Most of the non-Garo-speaking population of the district is concentrated around the edges, leaving most of the interior almost ethnically pure. In fact, the only people other than Garos who are at all dispersed throughout the district are a few Nepalis living in widely scattered settlements. They are recent immigrants who maintain large herds of cattle and sell milk or manufacture ghee. Another 50,000 Garos were listed by the census in other parts of Assam, mostly in the districts immediately bordering the Garo Hills, and about 40,000 live in the adjacent districts of East Pakistan. Except for a few recent emigrants, then, the Garos form a geographically compact population. If they are distributed through a number of districts, this is largely because the borders of the district do not coincide perfectly with the area occupied by the tribe, though the borders were intended to do this as well as possible. The census reports of the district have shown an increase in every ten-year period since 1901, when the population was returned as only 138,274, just over half that shown by the most recent census. Part of the increase is probably due to immigration from other districts, but most is surely the result of natural expansion which-in spite of an appalling death rate, especially among children-seems to be keeping pace with the rest of India.’
[3]
We can therefore speak of a shared polity population in this case.
[1]: Kar, Biman 1995. “Changing A’Chik-Mande: Need For Further Research”, 54 [2]: Majumdar, Dhirendra Narayan 1978. “Culture Change In Two Garo Villages”, 17 [3]: Burling, Robbins 1963. “Rengsanggri: Family And Kinship In A Garo Village”, 20 |
||||||
|
People. Maddison Project Estimates
[1]
Alternate estimates: In 1877 CE? according to contemporary literature: Area: 8,754,793 square miles. Population: 284,110,693. [2] According to statistician Patrick Colquhoun, the total population of the Empire in 1814 was 61.15 Million. A Treatise on the Wealth, Power and Resources of the British Empire 398.4 million in 1901 [3] [1]: https://www.rug.nl/ggdc/historicaldevelopment/maddison/releases/maddison-project-database-2018 [2]: (Bartholomew 1877, v) John Bartholomew. 1877. Atlas of the British empire throughout the world. George Philip and Son. London. [3]: Census of the British Empire, 1901: Report with Summary and Detailed Tables for the Several Colonies, &c. London: His Majesty’s Stationery Office, 1906. |
||||||
|
People. “According to the 1910 census, which included Bosnia-Herzegovina, the monarchy had a population of 51,390,000, greater than that of France. Of that total, 28,572,000 lived in Cisleithania, 20,886,000 in Hungary, and 1,932,000 in Bosnia-Herzegovina.”
[1]
[1]: (Curtis 2013: 296) Curtis, Benjamin. 2013. The Habsburgs: The History of a Dynasty. London; New York: Bloomsbury. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/TRKUBP92 |
||||||
|
The 1926 Soviet Union census, a comprehensive demographic survey, provided crucial insights into the population size and composition of the newly formed Soviet state. It captured detailed data on various aspects including age, gender, ethnicity, occupation, and literacy rates, painting a multifaceted picture of the society at that time. This data was pivotal in shaping subsequent economic and social policies within the Soviet Union.
[1]
In twelve years the urban population more than doubled, reaching 56.1 million (33 percent of the total population) by 1939, a rate of urbanization historically without precedent. In terms of the economic structure of the working class, the share of workers and employees (along with their family members) reached half of the total population by 1939, up from roughly one-sixth in 1926. The virtually complete collectivization of farming was also indicated by census figures. While the 1939 Soviet census has not been widely utilized, it nevertheless provided a framework of organizational experience and added to a popular understanding of statistical methods. These developments helped especially in conducting the numerous emergency survey counts that were necessary during World War II. Twenty years passed before another comprehensive census took place on Soviet soil, on January 15, 1959. The date chosen at least allowed for comparisons by twenty-year intervals, and the published tables often included previously unreleased 1939 totals as well. However, the large territorial gains following World War II and the devastating effect that war losses had on the age and sex structure of the population made comparisons between census years quite difficult. Furthermore, unlike the Soviet censuses of 1920 and 1926, the 1959 questionnaire did not request information on place of birth, making difficult even a crude estimate of migration. The organization and administration of the population count in 1959 marked a standardization in Soviet census-taking procedures; most of the methods instituted in 1959 remained virtually unchanged for the succeeding Soviet censuses of 1970 and 1979. [2] The 1989 Soviet census was the last one that took place in the Soviet Union. In 1989, the Soviet Union ranked as the third most populous in the world, above the United States. [3] [1]: Всесоюзная перепись населения 17 декабря 1926 г (Издание ЦСУ Союза ССР, 1928). Zotero link: T9JQGM8H [2]: Research Guide to the Russian and Soviet Censuses (Cornell University Press, 1986), accessed November 22, 2023, https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7591/j.ctt1g69xfv. Zotero link: EPDK4KRV [3]: “Демоскоп Weekly - Приложение. Справочник Статистических Показателей.,” accessed November 22, 2023, https://www.demoscope.ru/weekly/pril.php. Zotero link: MZMZFQN2 |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
people. Sanders et al. (1979) tentatively estimated that there were approx. 5,000 people in the Basin of Mexico at the end of the Early Formative Period c.1150 BC, and approx. 25,000 people in the Basin of Mexico at the end of the Middle Formative Period c.650 BC.
[1]
In a recent personal communication, David Carballo suggests Chalcatzingo as the largest settlement in this period, with a rough population estimate of "3-5k" These estimates are "tentative" because they involve numerous arbitrary estimations. Not only were non-surveyed areas’ populations guessed at, but Early and Middle Formative cermaics were mis-diagnosed in the BOM archaeological surveys, and subsequent re-evaluations of the survey ceramic collections by Tolstoy indicated that numerous Early Formative sites were embedded within Middle Formative sites (but their physical extent was no longer calculable).
[2]
[3]
Revisions of the Formative survey data based on Tolstoy’s findings have not been published. Additionally, Tolstoy, Fish, and Niederberger have found a poor correspondence between subsurface remains and surface scatters’ density and extent, leading to systematic underestimation of Formative sites’ areas and populations.
[4]
[5]
[6]
[1]: Sanders, William T., Jeffrey R. Parsons, and Robert S. Santley. (1979) The Basin of Mexico: Ecological Processes in the Evolution of a Civilization. Academic Press, New York, pg. 183. [2]: Tolstoy, Paul, Suzanne K. Fish, Martin W. Boksenbaum, Kathryn Blair Vaughn and C. Earle Smith. (1977). "Early Sedentary Communities of the Basin of Mexico." Journal of Field Archaeology, 4(1): 91-106. [3]: Tolstoy, Paul. (1975) "Settlement and Population Trends in the Basin of Mexico (Ixtapaluca and Zacatenco Phases)" Journal of Field Archaeology, 2(4): 331-349. [4]: Paul Tolstoy. (1989) "Coapexco and Tlatilco: sites with Olmec material in the Basin of Mexico", In Regional Perspectives on the Olmec, Robert J. Sharer & David C. Grove (eds.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pg. 87-121. [5]: Tolstoy, Paul and Suzanne K. Fish. (1975) "Surface and Subsurface Evidence for Community Size at Coapexco, Mexico." Journal of Field Archaeology, 2(1/2): 97-104 [6]: Niederberger, Christine. (2000) "Ranked Societies, Iconographic Complexity, and Economic Wealth in the Basin of Mexico Toward 1200 BC." In Olmec Art and Archaeology in Mesoamerica, edited by John E. Clark and Mary E. Pye. New Haven: Yale University Press, pp. 169-192. |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
People. Population estimates for the three chiefdoms in the valley at this time range from 1000-2000 people, with the largest population concentrated in the northern arm with San José Mogote as the primary center.
[1]
[2]
"The population of the Valley of Oaxaca did not grow appreciably throughout the Middle Formative period (ca. 850-500 BC)."
[3]
"Table 11.3. Population in the largest centers, by phase, in Oaxaca and Ejutla."
[4]
Valley of Oaxaca population (Largest center in Oaxaca): Tierras Largas: 327 (128); San Jose: 1942 (1384); Guadalupe: 1788 (774); Rosario: 1835 (564); Early I: 14652 (5250); Late I: 51339 (17242); Monte Alban II: 41927 (14492); Monte Alban IIIA: 120121 (16507); Monte Alban IIIB: 78930 (24189); Monte Alban IV: 77612 (16117); Monte Alban V: 166467 (13831).
[4]
[1]: Spencer, C. S. and E. M. Redmond (2003). "Militarism, resistance, and early state development in Oaxaca, Mexico." Social Evolution & History 2: 25-70, p33 [2]: Marcus, J. and K. V. Flannery (1996). Zapotec civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley, Thames and Hudson London, p125-6 [3]: (Feinman and Nicholas 2017, 27) Gary M Feinman. Linda M Nicholas. 2017. Settlement Patterns in the Albarradas Area of Highland Oaxaca, Mexico: Frontiers, Boundaries, and Interaction. Fieldiana Anthropology, 46(1):1-162. Publication 1572. Field Museum of Natural History. URL: http://www.bioone.org/doi/full/10.3158/0071-4739-46.1.1 [4]: (Feinman and Nicholas 2013, 183) Gary M Feinman. Linda M Nicholas. 2013. Settlement Patterns of the Ejutla Valley, Oaxaca, Mexico: A Diachronic Macroscale Perspective. Fieldiana Anthropology, 43(1):1-330. 2013. Field Museum of Natural History. URL: http://www.bioone.org/doi/full/10.3158/0071-4739-43.00.1 |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
Official contemporary figures for the Kingdom of Wei in 263 CE. However, note the following (from the same source):
"In studying the populations of the North, based on the extant demographic information of which the Chinese sources have preserved a large amount, a word of caution is in order. In most cases, population figures in the sources deal with households rather than individuals, and they do not distinguish between urban and rural populations. Further, the figures are based on the official registries, and include neither those who resided beyond the reach of a state in decline nor the liumin; that is, transients whose numbers could escalate in times of disorder. Thus some rough estimates have to be made. "Enough demographic records have been preserved to allow a preliminary examination of the population trends in the North during the period in question. These records, however, are not based on surveys of entire popula- tions but of “registered subjects”; that is, taxpayers and their dependents. Consequently, such records seriously undercount actual populations, probably by as much as a quarter to a third, if not more." [1] [1]: (Xiong 2019: 323-324) Xiong, V. C. 2019. The Northern Economy. In Dien and Knapp (eds) The Cambridge History of China Volume 2: The Six Dynasties 220-589 pp. 309-329. Cambridge University Press. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/KZB84M8U/library |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
People.
Egypt (5 m), Levant (0.5m) and Syria (1.5m) in 1300 CE. [1] Demographic decline from 1348 CE (plague). [2] Population of Egypt 4 million in 1348 CE. [3] Suggested estimates: 5-6 million in 1300 CE, 3.5 million in 1400 CE; 3.2 million in 1500 CE [4] Famines in Egypt [5] 1284 CE, 1295 CE, 1296 CE, 1335 CE [1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978) [2]: (Raymond 2000, 116) [3]: (Raymond 2000, 120) [4]: (Korotayev Andrey. Personal Communication to Jill Levine, Dan Hoyer, and Peter Turchin. May 2020.) [5]: (Nicolle 2014) Nicolle, D. 2014 Mamluk Askar 1250-1517. Osprey Publishing Ltd. |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
People. [225,000; 105,000], coded as a range 100,000-225,000. AD. This is a rough estimate that needs to be checked by an expert.
If there were at least two realms within the Zarafshan basin then the population estimate should be divided between them (200,000). Another source suggests a federation of five tribes - so the estimate could also be divided between five (80,000). These figures presumably refer to the migrant population: how many inhabitants were there already living in the locales (if the invasion was not accompanied by genocide)? (JR: Woodcock said that ’there is no evidence of any general or even local massacre of the ordinary Greek population [in Bactria] after the nomad victories’. [1] ) Given the relatively small size of these polities, this latter estimate could be directly added to the total. The largest settlement size for Greco-Bactria 200 BCE currently is estimated about 25,000. According to Chinese sources, the Yueh-chih had a total population of 400,000 including 100,000 warriors. [2] This number would correspond to the federation of five tribes, not to each separate polity. "Thus, both the written sources and the numismatic data show that Transoxiana in the 2nd and 1st centuries B.C.lacked internal political unity. Even Sughd (the basin of the river Zarafshan) was divided between at least two realms, this corresponding more or less to the later partition of the Zarafshan valley into "Bukharan Sughd" and "Samarkandian Sughd"; accordingly we have imitations of tetradrachms of Euthydemus and imitations of drachms of Antiochus I, with a horse’s head on the reverse side." [3] [1]: (Woodcock 1966, 130 in Hill 2009, 319) John E. Hill. 2009. Through the Jade Gate to Rome: A Study of the Silk Routes during the Later Han Dynasty, 1st to 2nd Centuries CE. An Annotated Translation of the Chronicle on the ’Western Regions’ from the Hou Hanshu. Charleston, SC: BookSurge Publishing. [2]: (Burjakov 1991, 199) [3]: (Zeimal 1983, 246) |
||||||
|
"By about CE 1200, there were fewer than 200,000 people in the Basin; in 1519, there were about 1.6 million. Thus the population doubled every 100 years between 1200 and 1500".
[1]
[1]: (Evans 2004: 438) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/EWW3Q2TA. |
||||||
|
People.
|
||||||
|
Inhabitants at peak. Sources mention population drop in the 1400s - so probably fewer people during this period. These sources refer to Classic Angkor and not the post-Classic period. ’At its peak, Angkor sprawled over nearly 1000 km2 [1] and may have housed more than three quarters of a million people [2,3].’
[1]
’With a fluctuating but persistent political dominance that extended from the ninth to the fourteenth centuries, it is hardly surprising that Angkor could built a temple enclosure (Angkor Wat) the size of central Tikal (Figure 11.11) and create a low-density urban complex with a water management network that spread across nearly 1,000 km^2 of intermeshed urban-rural landscape. That landscape could have fed between 300,000 and 750,000 human beings (see Fletcher et al. 2003:117 for assessment by Lustig).’
[2]
’Angkor. It is now clear that the temple complex was the centre of an enormous dispersed city, home to up to one million inhabitants, making it the largest city of antiquity. ’
[3]
’Although it is likely that Groslier’s original population estimate was too high, Angkor was probably the largest pre-industrial city in the world. The most recent archaeological work indicates that one million is a reasonable estimate of the city’s size.’
[4]
’Acker has given detailed consideration to the area that could have been irrigated, the water requirement, likely yields, and the location of the barays relative to one another and the land below them. His calculations were based on Groslier’s estimate of a population at Angkor in the vicinity of 1,900,000 people, of whom 600,000 were supported by 86,000 hectares (215,000 acres) of irrigated rice fields. In the dry season, a hectare would require 15,000 cubic meters (525,000 cu. ft.) of water. Assuming all the major barays at Angkor were full to a depth of three meters (9.9 ft.), they could have supplied 7,000 hectares (17,500 acres). If they yielded 1.46 tons of rice per hectare and annual consumption was 220 kilograms (484 lbs.) of rice per capita, the dry season yield would have maintained about 44,500 people, about 2.5 percent of the estimated population. This calculation is based only on the amount of water available when the barays were three meters deep. It does not take into account the possibility that the barays were constantly replenished with water from the Siem Reap River throughout the dry season. There is also the possibility that the reservoirs were used to supplement water supplies to the fields when there was insufficient rainfall during the wet sea- son. If so, then a further 9,000 metric tons (9,900 tons) over and above anticipated wet-season production could have been obtained, making the total irrigated yield 19,200 tons, sufficient to feed nearly 100,000 people.’
[5]
’At its peak, the population of the impe- rial core may have exceeded 1.5 million.’
[6]
’At its height, Angkor was the largest premodern settlement in the world, a city of more than 700,000 spread over a larger area than modern Los Angeles. Its crowning achievement was Angkor Wat, built at the kingdom’s height in the early twelfth century. Topped by five towers, arranged in an “X” pattern like the dots on a die, Angkor Wat was designed as a microcosmic representation of Mount Meru, the center of the universe in Hindu and Buddhist cosmology. This vast complex, still the largest religious building in the world, remains a powerful representation of Angkor’s military, artistic, and economic might, as well as the absolute rule of the God Kings, who were said to “eat their kingdom,” ruling with an iron fist.’
[7]
The figure was probably smaller toward the 1400s when the Phnom Penh area became the centre of the kingdom of Cambodia.
[1]: (Penny et al 2014, p. e84252) [2]: (Fletcher 2012, pp.300-302) [3]: (Tully 2005, p. 33) [4]: (Tully 2005, p. 44) [5]: (Higham 2004, p. 162) [6]: (Lieberman 2003, p. 219) [7]: (Strangio 2014, pp. 3-4) |
||||||
|
people. Taxila. Estimate for 200 BCE.
[1]
Evidence of irrigation and the flourishing trade network seems to indicate a growth of population in the region controlled by the Indo-Greek Kingdom. However, this is largely speculative based on the current archaeological record.
[1]: (Chase-Dunn: pers. comm. 2011) |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
People.
Turkey contained 1.5 million by the chalcolithic (2500 BC) and 3 million "during the course of the full Bronze age". [1] The polity territory isn’t anywhere near 750,000 km2 of Anatolia. If we assume at this time the polity controlled 10% of the region that would be 300,000 people. This would be a lower limit if we further suppose that the Hittite region, being the most developed, would be the most densely populated. [1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 133) McEvedy, Colin. Jones, Richard. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books Ltd. London. |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
People.
Turkey contained 1.5 million by the chalcolithic (2500 BC) and 3 million "during the course of the full Bronze age". [1] The polity territory isn’t anywhere near 750,000 km2 of Anatolia. If we assume at height the polity controlled 25% of the region that would be 750,000 people. This would be a lower limit if we further suppose that the Hittite region, being the most developed, would be the most densely populated. [1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 133) McEvedy, Colin. Jones, Richard. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books Ltd. London. |
||||||
|
People. 5,000,000: 1045 BCE.
[1]
3000 BCE about a million either side of lower Huang Ho (Longshan culture), plus 1 million food-gatherers elsewhere. In Shang period agricultural area extended 1 million KM, population had become 5 million people (6m total in China). [2] [1]: (Liu 2005: 240) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/Q77FKW2H?. [2]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 170-172) |
||||||
|
People. Data from Mauryan Empire. The Sunga Dynasty was in effect the continuation of the Mauryan Empire as it was established in a coup by the Mauryan general Pushyamitra Sunga (Roy 2015, 19).
[1]
[1]: (Roy 2015: 19) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/35K9MMUW. |
||||||
|
People.
6,000,000: 1500 CE. Egypt (4m), Levant (0.5m) and Syria (1.5m). [1] Suggested estimates: 5-6 million in 1300 CE, 3.5 million in 1400 CE; 3.2 million in 1500 CE [2] [1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978) [2]: (Korotayev Andrey. Personal Communication to Jill Levine, Dan Hoyer, and Peter Turchin. May 2020.) |
||||||
|
People.
Estimate for the population of Bactria c400 CE. Bactria included part of modern Afghanistan and the region McEverdy and Jones (1979) called Russian Turkestan. In 400 CE McEvedy and Jones estimate 2.5 million and 2 million for those entire regions, respectively. [1] At this time in history Bactria would have been the core area of settled population in both these regions (with perhaps the exception of Khwarezm region in Russian Turkestan). However, core Bactria is only a very small part of northern Afghanistan. I would estimate 500,000 at most for the Afghan region and 1,000,000 for the region in Russian Turkestan, and express this as a range of 1-1.5 million. [1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1979) McEvedy, C. Jones, R. 1979. Atlas of World Population History. Allen Lane. London. |
||||||
|
People.
Hartman provides a general population estimate of 60 million, whilst Mote estimates 100 million by 1100 CE. Analysis by Lui suggests a figure between these numbers. No date estimates 60 million. "a general population of 60 million people." [1] 140 million [2] 1100 CE 100 million by 1100 CE. [3] 14,245,000 households in 1077 CE [4] -- 85,000,000 million if six per household? "The population of Song China in 1077 was over 80 million" [5] "The aggregate households registered by the government increased from 6,418,500 in 980 to 16,402,631 in 1078 CE. -- 38,000,000: 980 CE* and 98,000,000: 1078 CE million if six per household? [6]
[1]: (Hartman 2015, 29) [2]: (Peers 2002, 33) [3]: (Mote 2003, 164) Mote, Frederick W. 2003. Imperial China: 900-1800. Harvard University Press. [4]: (Liu 2015, 52) [5]: (Liu 2015, 61) [6]: (Liu 2015, 62) |
||||||
|
Likely unknown.
|
||||||
|
People. The population figures available refer to the colonial period only: ’In 1947 Chuuk’s population was about 9,200. By 1988 it was more than 35,000 with a density of about 385 persons per square kilometer.’
[1]
[1]: Goodenough, Ward and Skoggard 1999) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/5IETI75E. |
||||||
|
[1]
"Fig. 4.2. Qotakalli sites in the Cusco Basin (after AD 400)" redrawn from Bauer. [2] Qotakalli sites in the Cuzco Basin 1-5 ha sites: 16 0.25-1 ha sites: 35 If the 16 largest sites average 2.5 ha, and the 35 smallest sites averaged 0.625 ha Qotakalli sites cover a total of 61.875 ha. "Strong population growth occurred during this period" as revealed by settlement pattern data. [3] Information copied from the following polity sheet (Qotakalli) as the data comes from Bauer 2004 and Covey 2006. To Bauer, Qotakalli goes from 200-600CE, and Covey refers to the period between 400-600CE. [1]: (Brian Bauer 2015, personal communication) [2]: (Covey 2006, 60 cite: Bauer 2004) [3]: (Bauer 2004, 54) |
||||||
|
People. So far, no reliable estimates of population size have been found in the reviewed sources for the Norwegian period. We have therefore chosen to import the last dated population estimate from the Commonwealth period sheet. That figure was based on advice provided by experts: ’Hard demographic data is extremely difficult to find. Most scholars estimate the population around 930 CE between 5.000 and 20.000, with 10.000 as the consensus figure. The population in 1262 CE is estimated to be between 50.000 and 60.000. Population estimates are usually based on data on tax paying farmers. These data allow us to establish a minimum population. Around 1100 CE there were approximately 4500 tax-paying farmers and this number is usually multiplied by seven (the number of persons per household) to arrive at the estimate for the overall population.’
[1]
This is open to re-evaluation, as fluctuations in total population size of the island may have taken place after this date. ’Opinions differ on this. We tend to assume that the population gradually grew over the whole medieval period up to 1400 when the Black Death struck Iceland (1402). It seems possible (but far from certain) that the population had reached 100,000 by that time. Others tend to assume a relatively stable population around 40,000-60,000. A range between 50,000 and 90,000 should span most estimates.’
[1]
[1]: Árni Daniel Júlíusson and Axel Kristissen 2017, pers. comm. to E. Brandl and D. Mullins |
||||||
|
"Settlements varied between two primary forms in the Earlier Bronze Age. One was a simple hamlet of several small, square structures, probably housing one or more extended family groups. The other was a fortified town, usually built on an easily defended prominence and surrounded by a series of walls and ditches."
[1]
- from this quote I estimate 1000-2000 on basis that we have already about 1000 for Beaker Culture.
[1]: (Peregrine 2001, 412-413) |
||||||
|
People. (Liu 2005: 240) estimate. Did this change over time?
[1]
Coded previously as [20,000-40,000], but not very clear what this estimate is based on, and how it relates to the following: "By some estimates, the population of the Erlitou capital was at least 20,000 during the apex of its occupation, a huge increase from the estimated population of no more than 5,000 during the preceding Longshan period. It appears that the population of most of the other Erlitou culture sites in the region was no more than about 1,000. This is the first time in East Asia that such a large concentration of population was found in a regional center."
[2]
[1]: (Liu and Chen 2012: 263) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/DE5TU7HY?. [2]: (Xu 2013, 307) |
||||||
|
People. An estimate of up to 300 people, i.e. the same as the population of a village.
[1]
The Spanish subjected parts of the Shuar population, but were unable to maintain control over Shuar territory as a whole: ’The first reported white penetration of Jivaro territory was made in 1549 by a Spanish expedition under Hernando de Benavente. Later expeditions of colonists and soldiers soon followed. These newcomers traded with the Jivaro, made peace pacts with them, and soon began to exploit the gold found in alluvial or glacial deposits in the region. Eventually the Spaniards were able to obtain the co-operation of some of the Indians in working the gold deposits, but others remained hostile, killing many of the colonists and soldiers at every opportunity. Under the subjection of the Spaniards, the Jivaro were required to pay tribute in gold dust; a demand that increased yearly. Finally, in 1599, the Jivaro rebelled en masse, killing many thousands of Spaniards in the process and driving them from the region. After 1599, until nearly the middle of the nineteenth century, Jivaro-European relations remained intermittent and mostly hostile. A few missionary and military expeditions entered the region from the Andean highlands, but these frequently ended in disaster and no permanent colonization ever resulted. One of the few "friendly" gestures reported for the tribe during this time occurred in 1767, when they gave a Spanish missionizing expedition "gifts", which included the skulls of Spaniards who had apparently been killed earlier by the Jivaro (Harner, 1953: 26). Thus it seems that the Jivaros are the only tribe known to have successfully revolted against the Spanish Empire and to have been able to thwart all subsequent attempts by the Spaniards to conquer them. They have withstood armies of gold seeking Inkas as well as Spaniards, and defied the bravado of the early conquistadors.’
[1]
The gradual ’fraying out’ of colonial control from ’frontier’ to ’interior’ communities makes the drawing of clear territorial and demographic boundaries more difficult: ’Much of the trade of the Jivaro is between the "interior", relatively isolated groups (particularly the Achuara) and those "frontier" groups living in close proximity to Ecuadorian settlements where they have easy access to Western industrialized products. Through a series of neighborhood-to-neighborhood relays by native trading partners (AMIGRI) these products were passed from the frontier Jivaro into the most remote parts of the tribal territory. Thus the interior Jivaro were supplied with steel cutting tools, firearms and ammunition without having to come into contact with the population of European ancestry. In exchange the frontier Jivaro, whose supply of local game was nearly exhausted, obtained hides, feathers and bird skins (used for ornaments), which were not readily available in their own territory.’
[1]
As indicated above, the Shuar political system was decentralized and fragmented, given the persistence of autonomous communities and ad hoc alliances in warfare. We therefore cannot confidently provide proxy measures.
[1]: Beierle, John: eHRAF Cultural Summary for the Jivaro |
||||||
|
People.
|
||||||
|
People.By 200 BC 30 million on the Indian Subcontinent, 20 million (40%) in Ganges basin. "The next fifteen hundred years consolidated without significantly altering this pattern."
[1]
McEvedy and Jones estimated for Pakistan, India and Bangladesh 62m for 800 CE, 69.5m for 900 CE. Estimate made using territory estimate, assuming roughly even distribution of people
[1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 182-185) McEvedy, Colin. Jones, Richard. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books Ltd. London. |
||||||
|
People.
|
||||||
|
People.
|
||||||
|
People. Population of the American Bottom was negligible before Sponemann-Collinsville-Loyd phase.
|
||||||
|
McEvedy and Jones have just under 3 million for Egypt at 400 BCE.
|
||||||
|
[1]
"Fig. 4.2. Qotakalli sites in the Cusco Basin (after AD 400)" redrawn from Bauer. [2] Qotakalli sites in the Cuzco Basin 1-5 ha sites: 16 0.25-1 ha sites: 35 If the 16 largest sites average 2.5 ha, and the 35 smallest sites averaged 0.625 ha Qotakalli sites cover a total of 61.875 ha. "Strong population growth occurred during this period" as revealed by settlement pattern data. [3] [1]: (Brian Bauer 2015, personal communication) [2]: (Covey 2006, 60 cite: Bauer 2004) [3]: (Bauer 2004, 54) |
||||||
|
Cuzco: 15,000?
Cuzco valley: 5,000-10,000. According to a Spaniard in mid 16th century, valley held over 20,000. [1] However, in the 1000-1250 CE period irrigation and terracing works had not all been completed, so maybe a bit less. Cuzco valley population "grew markedly after about AD 1000" [2] "There were many other settlements in the Lucre area; some of them, such as Minaspata and Coto-coto, were almost as large as Choquepukio (Dwyer 1971: 41; Glowacki 2002: 271). Since those towns likely housed several thousand people each, the populace collectively posed an ongoing challenge to Inca hegemony. Sarmiento’s (2007: 87, 96, 99) informants said that four successive Inca rulers - from Inka Roca to Pachakuti - all took up arms against them, but only the last was able to finally subjugate and then disperse them. Because of the extended animosities, it is no surprise that the Oropesa area that lay between them was an unoccupied buffer zone for much of the early era (Bauer and Covey 2004: 84-7)." [3] The possibly allied site of Cotocotuyoc was 45 ha. [4] If the three main towns had several thousand inhabitants each, we can infer that the Lucre confederation had at least 10,000 inhabitants. [1]: (Bauer 2004, 189, 227) [2]: (D’Altroy 2014, 79) [3]: (D’Altroy 2014, 81-82) [4]: (Glowacki 2002, 271) |
||||||
|
Average polity size.
368,000/5 = 73,600 Some idea for scale of tribal populations comes from Caesar at the time of his invasion of Gaul. Helvetii, Tulingi, Latobrigi, Rauraci and Boii wanted to move from Switzerland to South West Gaul. According to Caesar (c50 BCE) there were 368,000 in total. Another tribe, the Suebi numbered 120,000 people. [1] [1]: (Collis 2003, 107) |
||||||
|
People. Very few settlements have been actually been excavated and not with nearly the horizontal sample that we should need to be able to address questions of population estimates.
|
||||||
|
People. We have assumed that reliable data on the total size of the Iban population are unavailable for the pre-Brooke Raj period. However, as noted above, each longhouse constituted its own autonomous unit,
[1]
and a "longhouse may include as few as four families with 25 residents in a structure less than 15 meters long, or as many as 80 families with 500 residents in a house about 300 meters long."
[1]
[1]: Vinson H. Sutlive, Jr. and John Beierle: eHRAF Cultural Summary for the Iban |
||||||
|
People. There is a mismatch between polity territory and polity population. Very rough estimate assuming small communities of ~10 100-or-so person villages
2500-800 BCE (European Bronze Age) "Each autonomous political community consisted of around a hundred people on average, distributed in five to eight small settlements." [1] [1]: (Brun 1995, 14) |
||||||
|
People.
There was a fortified center which was possibly "the seat of the local aristocracy." [1] Estimate of 5,000 for just after end of this period. "Rather than a small hillfort of just a few hectares, as once believed, we can now see that in the first half of the 6th century BC Heuneburg was an enormous settlement of 100 ha and at least 5,000 inhabitants." [2] [1]: (Brun 1995, 15) [2]: (Fernández Götz and Krausse 2012, 31) |
||||||
|
People.
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
Urban settlements were relatively small-scale (tens of thousands) whilst the land area also low. Land area held would not have supported highest population density for the Italy region (highest in Po valley), although part of the Po valley was held. The major cities Rome, Ravenna, Bologna, Ancona probably contained no more than 120,000. The "Latium: Medieval Era (500-1500 CE)" coding page currently estimates the population of the Latium region only as: 335000: 904 CE; 110000: 1422 CE. These estimates for Latium conflict with the crude estimates based on the McEvedy and Jones figures for the whole of Italy since the latter do not drop from 850-1450 CE, they rise.
|
||||||
|
3,750,000 around 220 BCE.
[1]
"Roman and Italian pool of men on which Rome could draw was of the order of 1-2 million." [2] Crawford’s reference is to men only. Including women, old people and children the population may have been about the level suggested by Dupuy and Dupuy. [1]: (Dupuy and Dupuy 2007) [2]: (Crawford 2001, 37) |
||||||
|
Research on Badarian sites yielded a total of about 600 graves and forty poorly documented settlements
[1]
Were these settlements all one polity? Possibly. Analysis of Badarian grave goods demonstrates an unequal distribution of wealth and the wealthier graves tend to be separated in one part of the cemetery. This clearly indicates social stratification. [2] Evidence from Badarian settlements shows that the economy of the culture was primarily based on agriculture and husbandry. [3] Extensive agriculture present. [1]: Shaw, I. 2003. The Oxford History of Ancient Egypt. New York: Oxford University Press. Pg. 36. [2]: Shaw, I. 2003. The Oxford History of Ancient Egypt. New York: Oxford University Press. Pg.37. [3]: Shaw, I. 2003. The Oxford History of Ancient Egypt. New York: Oxford University Press. Pg.39. |
||||||
|
Assuming 50-200 people per ha and 9 ha, we have an estimate of 450-1800. “The extent of the built up areas [of Pirak] remains practically constant, almost 9 hectares, and the apparent conservatism of the material culture are factors that bear witness to an undeniable stability of the settlement.”
[1]
but "...it has proved impossible for the moment to define in a less summary fashion its probable area of geographical distribution. As far as the region is concerned, the mound of Pirak is the only one of its kind."
[2]
. Although, the material culture found at Pirak has also been uncovered in a much wider area in the north of the Kachi Plain
[3]
, and as far as southern Central Asia and the Ganges valley.
[4]
The population of Pirak has not been estimated.
[5]
[6]
[1]: Jarrige, J-F. (1979) Fouilles de Pirak. Paris : Diffusion de Boccard. p390 [2]: Jarrige, J-F. (1979) Fouilles de Pirak. Paris : Diffusion de Boccard.p388 [3]: Jarrige, J-F. (1979) Fouilles de Pirak. Paris : Diffusion de Boccard. p389 [4]: Jarrige, J-F. (2000) Continuity and Change in the North Kachi Plain (Baluchistan, Pakistan) at the beginning of the Second Millennium BC. In, Lahiri, N. The Decline and Fall of the Indus Civilization. Permanent Black, Delhi., pp345-362. p355 [5]: Jarrige, J-F. (1997) From Nausharo to Pirak: Continuity and Change in the Kachi/Bolan Region from the 3rd to the 2nd Millennium BC. In, Allchin, R. and Allchin, B. (eds) South Asian Archaeology, 1995, volume I. The Ancient India and Iran Trust, Cambridge., pp 11-32. [6]: Jarrige, J-F. (2000) Continuity and Change in the North Kachi Plain (Baluchistan, Pakistan) at the beginning of the Second Millennium BC. In, Lahiri, N. The Decline and Fall of the Indus Civilization. Permanent Black, Delhi., pp345-362. |
||||||
|
People.
|
||||||
|
People. "Despite the fact that the population of Han China, according to a census taken during the middle of the dynasty, has been counted at about 60 million people as compared to the total population of nomads north of China, which is postulated as not reaching 1.5 million people, the Xiongnu still managed to withstand, and parlay on equal terms with, the Qin and Han dynasties."
[1]
[1]: (Kradin 2011, 77) |
||||||
|
People. Gary Feinman (pers. comm.): population should be larger (>100,100? will get reference)
The overall population of the valley increased during this period, but was divided into numerous (15-20, based on evidence for the MA V phase) smaller political entities. [1] The population of the whole valley (based on the total of settlement population estimates) would have been 89,973-199,830 people. [2] A very coarse estimate of the average polity population is taken as the average between the higher and lower population estimates for the whole valley (144,901 people) divided by 15 and 20 to give a higher and lower range of polity size (9660 and 7245 people respectively). The precise numbers for the polity population estimates should not be taken as accurate predictions of polity population size. "Table 6.1. Late Classic population in Valley of Oaxaca subareas." [3] Etla: 24053 (MA IIIB); Central 39189 (MA IIIB); N Valle Grande 23000 (Early IIIB-IV); S Valle Grande: 13000 (Early IIIB-IV); W Tlacolula: 21000 (Early IIIB-IV); E Tlacolula: 18000 (Early IIIB-IV); Ejutla (Early IIIB-IV): 8000; Albarradas: 1000 (Early IIIB-IV); Sola: 7000 (Early IIIB-IV). [3] Total (Monte Alban IIIB): 154,242 "Table 6.1. Late Classic population in Valley of Oaxaca subareas." [3] Etla: 15000 (Late IIIB-IV); Central: 18000 (Late IIIB-IV); N Valle Grande: 18678 (MA IV); S Valle Grande: 9439 (MA IV); W Tlacolula: 15761 (MA IV); E Tlacolula: 24132 (MA IV); Ejutla: 3029 (MA IV); Albarradas: 2406 (MA IV); Sola: 7066 (MA IV). [3] Total (Monte Alban IV): 113,511 "Table 11.3. Population in the largest centers, by phase, in Oaxaca and Ejutla." [4] Valley of Oaxaca population (Largest center in Oaxaca): Tierras Largas: 327 (128); San Jose: 1942 (1384); Guadalupe: 1788 (774); Rosario: 1835 (564); Early I: 14652 (5250); Late I: 51339 (17242); Monte Alban II: 41927 (14492); Monte Alban IIIA: 120121 (16507); Monte Alban IIIB: 78930 (24189); Monte Alban IV: 77612 (16117); Monte Alban V: 166467 (13831). [4] [1]: Feinman, G. M., et al. (1985). "Long-term demographic change: A perspective from the valley of Oaxaca, Mexico." Journal of Field Archaeology 12(3): 333-362. p359-61 [2]: Kowalewski, S. A., Feiman, G.M., Finsten, L., Blanton, R. E. and Nicholas, L. M. Monte Albán’s Hinterland, Part II: the prehispanic settlement patterns in Tlacoula, Etla and Ocotlán, the Valley of Oaxaca, Mexico. Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Number 23. Ann Arbor [3]: (Feinman and Nicholas 2017, 84) Gary M Feinman. Linda M Nicholas. 2017. Settlement Patterns in the Albarradas Area of Highland Oaxaca, Mexico: Frontiers, Boundaries, and Interaction. Fieldiana Anthropology, 46(1):1-162. Publication 1572. Field Museum of Natural History. URL: http://www.bioone.org/doi/full/10.3158/0071-4739-46.1.1 [4]: (Feinman and Nicholas 2013, 183) Gary M Feinman. Linda M Nicholas. 2013. Settlement Patterns of the Ejutla Valley, Oaxaca, Mexico: A Diachronic Macroscale Perspective. Fieldiana Anthropology, 43(1):1-330. 2013. Field Museum of Natural History. URL: http://www.bioone.org/doi/full/10.3158/0071-4739-43.00.1 |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
The overall population of the valley increased during this period, but was divided into numerous (15-20) smaller political entities.
[1]
The population of the whole valley (based on the total of settlement population estimates) would have been 95,523-229,581 people.
[2]
A very coarse estimate of the average polity population is taken as the average between the higher and lower population estimates for the whole valley (162,552 people) divided by 15 and 20 to give a higher and lower range of polity size (10,836 and 8,127 people respectively). The precise numbers for the polity population estimates should not be taken as accurate predictions of polity population size.
"Table 7.1. Monte Alban V sites in Valley of Oaxaca subareas." [3] Etla: 15404; Central: 20,839; N Valle Grande: 24938; S Valle Grande 23919; W Tlacolula: 41255; E Tlacolula: 40119; Ejutla: 19970; Albarradas: 5416; Sola: 9168. Total: 201,028 "Table 10.1. Population of Late Postclassic polities in the Central Valleys of Oaxaca." [4] Population ’shatter zone’: Coatecas: 3500; Coyotepec: 4600; Eastern Etla: 9900; Ejutla: 4300; El Choco: 4200; El Vergel: 4100; Huitzo: 3500; Ixlahuaca: 5900. Jalieza: 8800; Macuilxochitl: 23400; Matatlan: 3100; Mitla: 23000; Quialana: 5700; Sa’a Yucu: 18800; San Luis Beltran: 3000; San Miguel de Valle: 4200. San Pedro Martir: 16600; Taniche: 5000; Teitipac: 9300; Tlalixtac: 9200; Tlapacoyan: 3300; Tule: 2500; Yagul/Tlacolula: 8300. Zautla/Tejalapan: 2400. Mean size: 7,700. [4] Don’t understand why in the list below this one in the same table for ’Centers/Ethnhnohistory’ many of these polities have different, larger populations. There is also a "Table 10.2. Population of other Late Postclassic polities in highland Oaxaca" which has an even longer list. [5] "Table 11.3. Population in the largest centers, by phase, in Oaxaca and Ejutla." [6] Valley of Oaxaca population (Largest center in Oaxaca): Tierras Largas: 327 (128); San Jose: 1942 (1384); Guadalupe: 1788 (774); Rosario: 1835 (564); Early I: 14652 (5250); Late I: 51339 (17242); Monte Alban II: 41927 (14492); Monte Alban IIIA: 120121 (16507); Monte Alban IIIB: 78930 (24189); Monte Alban IV: 77612 (16117); Monte Alban V: 166467 (13831). [6] [1]: Feinman, G. M., et al. (1985). "Long-term demographic change: A perspective from the valley of Oaxaca, Mexico." Journal of Field Archaeology 12(3): 333-362. p359-61 [2]: Kowalewski, S. A., Feiman, G.M., Finsten, L., Blanton, R. E. and Nicholas, L. M. Monte Albán’s Hinterland, Part II: the prehispanic settlement patterns in Tlacoula, Etla and Ocotlán, the Valley of Oaxaca, Mexico. Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Number 23. Ann Arbor [3]: (Feinman and Nicholas 2017, 99) Gary M Feinman. Linda M Nicholas. 2017. Settlement Patterns in the Albarradas Area of Highland Oaxaca, Mexico: Frontiers, Boundaries, and Interaction. Fieldiana Anthropology, 46(1):1-162. Publication 1572. Field Museum of Natural History. URL: http://www.bioone.org/doi/full/10.3158/0071-4739-46.1.1 [4]: (Feinman and Nicholas 2013, 158) Gary M Feinman. Linda M Nicholas. 2013. Settlement Patterns of the Ejutla Valley, Oaxaca, Mexico: A Diachronic Macroscale Perspective. Fieldiana Anthropology, 43(1):1-330. 2013. Field Museum of Natural History. URL: http://www.bioone.org/doi/full/10.3158/0071-4739-43.00.1 [5]: (Feinman and Nicholas 2013, 159) Gary M Feinman. Linda M Nicholas. 2013. Settlement Patterns of the Ejutla Valley, Oaxaca, Mexico: A Diachronic Macroscale Perspective. Fieldiana Anthropology, 43(1):1-330. 2013. Field Museum of Natural History. URL: http://www.bioone.org/doi/full/10.3158/0071-4739-43.00.1 [6]: (Feinman and Nicholas 2013, 183) Gary M Feinman. Linda M Nicholas. 2013. Settlement Patterns of the Ejutla Valley, Oaxaca, Mexico: A Diachronic Macroscale Perspective. Fieldiana Anthropology, 43(1):1-330. 2013. Field Museum of Natural History. URL: http://www.bioone.org/doi/full/10.3158/0071-4739-43.00.1 |
||||||
|
People.
|
||||||
|
"Just over one million people were living in the Valley of Mexico [...] in 1519 and another two to three million Aztecs dwelt in the surrounding valleys of central Mexico".
[1]
[1]: (Smith 1996: 60) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/6XJ65SKB |
||||||
|
No information found in relevant literature.
|
||||||
|
"By about CE 1200, there were fewer than 200,000 people in the Basin".
[1]
[1]: (Evans 2004: 438) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/EWW3Q2TA. |
||||||
|
people.
|
||||||
|
people.
|
||||||
|
"On the other hand, the “administrative centres” whose meticulous geometric design gave rise to the formal definition of Wari urbanism— e.g. Pikillacta or Viracochapampa—were never finished. It has been proven that these were never populous cities."
[1]
Alan Covey: "This is a difficult calculation, as there are not systematic settlement data for the entire central Andes that would allow for a valley-by-valley assessment of settlement levels. Even if there were, archaeologists would argue over population estimates and what the distribution of Wari-style material culture signifies in terms of state rule. Having said that, a very "back of the envelope" estimate might be to take the population estimate for the Wari capital and say that it might represent some percentage of the total population of the Ayacucho region--maybe that could be estimated based on the size of the capital and the rough estimate of settled area (with the capital assumed to be more densely settled than lower-order sites)? Beyond the Wari heartland, the nodes of direct Wari control represent a fairly modest area--a few hundred hectares at most, even if one buys the more generous estimates of Wari site counts (e.g., Jennings and Craig 2001) and of Cuzco Wari sites. I think that we did a maximal number of hectares at Wari peripheral sites in my co-authored 2013 paper (in a note), and that could be calculated using the same general assumptions for the heartland. My guess is that the number for those areas wouldn’t go much over about 100,000 people. However, Wari specialists will rightly argue that there should be some populations that served Wari through indirect or hegemonic relationships (although outside of Huarmey, there is little evidence of possible client rulers), and that would mean adding some arbitrary estimate of "indirect" subjects. So, maybe Wari polity population could be pegged in the low hundred thousands. Inca estimates run from a low of 2 million to more widely accepted estimates of 6-10 million, although these are based on backward mathematical acrobatics from spotty early Colonial population records. Still, there were A LOT more Inca subjects than Wari ones." [2] "The area encompassed by colonies and state architectural compounds outside the Ayacucho region reaches only a few hundred hectares at most." And the corresponding note: "This figure is heavily weighted by large size estimates for Cusco Wari sites (47 ha for Pikillacta and 150 ha for Huaro [Glowacki and Zapata, 1998; McEwan, 2005]). It also includes the incomplete site of Viracochapampa (32 ha), disputed sites such as Achachiwa (35 ha—see Doutriaux, 2004), and unconfirmed sites identified using air photos, such as Pariamarca and Tocroc. See Jennings (2006a: 269-270) for discussion of assumed lower-order Wari sites." [3] RA suggested a range of 100,000-500,000 taking into account most possibilities. Approved by Alan Covey: "If we think of a contemporaneous New World state like Teotihuacan, this falls in the range of the overall population estimates for the urban core and broader area of interest. There is tremendous uncertainty, but for me the important thing is the horizontal comparison (other first generation states) and vertical (Inca empire) comparison." [2] [1]: (Milosz and Makowski 2014, 286) [2]: Alan Covey 2017, pers. comm. [3]: (Covey et al. 2013, 550) Alan R. Covey, Brian S. Bauer, Véronique Bélisle and Lia Tsesmeli. 2013. ’Regional Perspectives on Wari State Influence in Cusco, Peru (c. AD 600-1000)’. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 32 (4): 538-52. |
||||||
|
People. The largest unit was the tribe. In the early 20th century the Orokavia population was about 9000, which would make each tribe about 750 people, on average. The Aiga had 1300 people spread over 50 villages.
[1]
[2]
The number of Orokaiva at the time of first contact is unknown due to lack of demographic data: ’The indigenous population of the Popondetta district totals some 36,500, of whom 26,500 are Orokaiva in the central lowland area. The number of Orokaiva at the time of Western contact is not known. [Editors note: Ethnologue (SIL International), lists 33,400 as of 1989.]’
[1]
Williams claims around 9,000 residents for the early 20th century. [This is a realistic figure. If conflicting figures exist, these will be found in the Papua Annual Reports.] ’It is on the assumption of general uniformity among the tribes that the present report claims to refer to the people as a whole. The tribe with which I am best acquainted is that of the Aiga, who seemed to offer the best opportunities for research because they are fairly central and as yet less contaminated by European influence than most of the others. Out of a total Orokaiva population of some 9,000, this tribe numbers approximately 1,300, who are scattered in nearly fifty villages on or between the Opi and Kumusi rivers. To avoid confusion it will be the rule of this report to use the Aiga dialectal form for native words.’
[2]
’Koropata is part of the Orokaivan linguistic division which according to Williams (1930:7) numbered about 9000 in the 1920s. The Orokaivans live mainly in the Saiho Census Division which is the most densely populated part of the Northern Province. In the 1980 census the population of this division was 8715 (National [Page 62] Statistics Office 1980:14). The Saiho Census area covers the rich volcanic plains around Mt Lamington, criss-crossed by numerous streams and rivers, notably the Kumusi River. The thick dark brown topsoil combined with a thin layer of volcanic ash produces extremely fertile soil. The warm humid climate and very high rainfall (2000-3500mm per annum) mean that the land is excellent for subsistence gardening and offers some of the best prospects for agricultural development in Northern Province (CSIRO 1954:4, 10-12).’
[3]
It is assumed here that this figure is more or less valid for the century prior to colonization as well, although this remains in need of further confirmation, if at all possible. But the kind of regional integration that created the Orokaiva as a unit was a product of colonial rule. There was no shared Orokaiva polity prior to colonization; as indicated below, temporary alliances on an ad hoc-basis, influential big men, and autonomous settlements predominated. The size of such unstable quasi-polities probably fluctuated heavily, depending on the influence of local big men and the size of the villages supporting them. We therefore cannot confidently provide a proxy representing a ’typical’ quasi-polity.
[1]: Latham, Christopher S.: eHRAF Cultural Summary for the Orokaiva [2]: Williams, F. E. (Francis Edgar), and Hubert Murray 1930. “Orokaiva Society”, 7 [3]: Newton, Janice 1985. “Orokaiva Production And Change”, 61 |
||||||
|
People. The number of Orokaiva at the time of first contact is unknown due to lack of demographic data: ’The indigenous population of the Popondetta district totals some 36,500, of whom 26,500 are Orokaiva in the central lowland area. The number of Orokaiva at the time of Western contact is not known. [Editors note: Ethnologue (SIL International), lists 33,400 as of 1989.]’
[1]
Williams claims around 9,000 residents for the early 20th century. [Ira Baschkow (pers. comm.): This is a realistic figure. If conflicting figures exist, these will be found in the Papua Annual Reports. Janice Newton (pers. comm.): Caveat: early colonists often underestimate the size of indigenous populations. Jonathan Ritchie (pers. comm.): Patrol reports could serve as a primary source to investigate this.] ’It is on the assumption of general uniformity among the tribes that the present report claims to refer to the people as a whole. The tribe with which I am best acquainted is that of the Aiga, who seemed to offer the best opportunities for research because they are fairly central and as yet less contaminated by European influence than most of the others. Out of a total Orokaiva population of some 9,000, this tribe numbers approximately 1,300, who are scattered in nearly fifty villages on or between the Opi and Kumusi rivers. To avoid confusion it will be the rule of this report to use the Aiga dialectal form for native words.’
[2]
’Koropata is part of the Orokaivan linguistic division which according to Williams (1930:7) numbered about 9000 in the 1920s. The Orokaivans live mainly in the Saiho Census Division which is the most densely populated part of the Northern Province. In the 1980 census the population of this division was 8715 (National [Page 62] Statistics Office 1980:14). The Saiho Census area covers the rich volcanic plains around Mt Lamington, criss-crossed by numerous streams and rivers, notably the Kumusi River. The thick dark brown topsoil combined with a thin layer of volcanic ash produces extremely fertile soil. The warm humid climate and very high rainfall (2000-3500mm per annum) mean that the land is excellent for subsistence gardening and offers some of the best prospects for agricultural development in Northern Province (CSIRO 1954:4, 10-12).’
[3]
The regional integration that allows us to treat the Orokaiva as a population rather than an assortment of individual tribes and villages was a result of colonial policies.
[1]: Latham, Christopher S.: eHRAF Cultural Summary for the Orokaiva [2]: Williams, F. E. (Francis Edgar), and Hubert Murray 1930. “Orokaiva Society”, 7 [3]: Newton, Janice 1985. “Orokaiva Production And Change”, 61 |
||||||
|
People.
4,800,000: 1400 CE. Egypt (2.8m), Levant (0.5m) and Syria (1.5m). [1] Demographic decline from 1348 CE (plague). [2] Egypt: 4 million prior to the Black Death in the middle of the 14th Century. [3] As a result of the Black Death "an Egyptian population of between 4.2 and 8 million may have declined by about one-quarter to one-third." [4] Suggested estimates: 5-6 million in 1300 CE, 3.5 million in 1400 CE; 3.2 million in 1500 CE [5] [1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 227) [2]: (Raymond 2000, 116) [3]: (Dols 1977, 149) [4]: (Dols 1977, 218) [5]: (Korotayev Andrey. Personal Communication to Jill Levine, Dan Hoyer, and Peter Turchin. May 2020.) |
||||||
|
is a rough calculation based on combining settlement estimates
|
||||||
|
People.
Population of Ottoman Empire [1] 1,000,000: 1325 CE 2,500,000: 1350 CE 5,000,000: 1400 CE 7,000,000: 1450 CE 9,000,000: 1500 CE 22,000,000: 1550 CE 28,000,000: 1600 CE 27,500,000: 1650 CE 24,000,000: 1700 CE 24,000,000: 1750 CE 24,000,000: 1800 CE 25,000,000: 1850 CE 25,000,000: 1900 CE [1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 137) |
||||||
|
people. "The total population of all tribes in Ontario is estimated to have been 60,000 and that in New York 40,000 - 50,000."
[1]
[1]: (Hasenstab 2001: 454) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/EQZYAI2R. |
||||||
|
"the population must still have been very small - an oft-cided estimate for the Middle Kingdom amounts to less than two million - ... "
[1]
Increased from 2 million to 2.5 million during Middle Kingdom. [2] “As Egypt’s population began to exceed food production levels, Amenemhat III ordered the exploitation of the green fertile region 100 km south of modern-day Cairo known as the Fayyum” [3] [1]: (Willems 2013, 343 cite: Butzer) [2]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 226) [3]: (http://www.cemml.colostate.edu/cultural/09476/egypt02-04enl.html) |
||||||
|
New Kingdom of Hatti coded 2 million for up to 45,000 km2, which is 44.4 per km2. Neo-Hittite state of 700 km2 * 44.4 density per km2 would provide an estimate of about 30,000. However, the Neo-Hittite states were no doubt based around the larger urban areas so this could be a bottom line figure. Considering that there would need to be 100 such states in the region of Turkey to reach the 3 million population figure (for Turkey - see McEvedy and Jones estimate) this "bottom line" figure may be too low. 3 million split among, say, 15 states in Turkey as a whole would give us 200,000 per polity. This seems closer to a reasonable range of perhaps 80,000-160,000.
Turkey contained 3 million "during the course of the full Bronze age". [1] [1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 133) McEvedy, Colin. Jones, Richard. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books Ltd. London. |
||||||
|
People.
A population estimate for the kingdom of Saba at its height could be used for the Himyarite kingdom which must have covered the same area, if not more. "At their heights, the Sabean and Himyarite kingdoms embraced much of historic Yemen." [1] "In turn Schippmann has used these already approximate estimates to arrive at figures of 310,000 to not greater than 500,000 people for the kingdom of Saba’ at its height. It must be emphasized, however, that the above figures of captives and corvee labour may well be exaggerated, and, the overall population estimates provided by Schippman, although useful, are little more than educated guesses. Moreover, they do not take into account the recent archaeological surveys conducted in the 1990s that demostrate a rather densely populated plateau... Overall, Schippmann contrasts his estimated population of 500,000 for the kingdom of Saba’ with a total estimated population of 1 million for the Indus civilization at its height..." [2] "Overall, it is sufficient to say that the Yemen plateau between Yarim and Sana’a and apparently to the north as well, was during the later first millennium BC and AD, very well populated with perhaps between 1 and 5 settlements per 100 km2. [2] [1]: (Burrows 2010, lxiii) Robert D Burrows. 2010. Historical Dictionary of Yemen. Second Edition. The Scarecrow Press, Inc. Lanham. [2]: (Wilkinson 2009, 58) Tony J Wilkinson. Environment and Long-Term Population Trends in Southwest Arabia. Michael D Petraglia. Jeffrey I Rose. eds. 2009. The Evolution of Human Populations in Arabia. Paleoenvironments, Prehistory and Genetics. Springer. Dordrecht. |
||||||
|
20,000-25,000 (Beloch). 40,000-50,000 (De Martino). 35,000 at most (Ampolo). 25,000-40,000 (Cornell).
[1]
Previous estimate: {[20,000-30,000]; [40,000-50,000]}
"as a consequence of Rome’s urban development during the sixth century, which involved increased economic activity, a rise in population from growth and incorporation of foreigners as new citizens, and the increase in the territorial extent of the Roman state, a new military organization was introduced to take advantage of these economic, demographic, and geographical changes, and the result was a hoplite phalanx recruited from new territorial districts called tribes." [2] [1]: (Cornell 1995, 205) [2]: (Forsythe 2006, 115) Forsythe, Gary. 2006. A Critical History of Early Rome: From Prehistory to the First Punic War. University of California Press. |
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
People.
A population estimate for the kingdom of Saba at its height could be used for the Himyarite kingdom which must have covered the same area, if not more. "At their heights, the Sabean and Himyarite kingdoms embraced much of historic Yemen." [1] "In turn Schippmann has used these already approximate estimates to arrive at figures of 310,000 to not greater than 500,000 people for the kingdom of Saba’ at its height. It must be emphasized, however, that the above figures of captives and corvee labour may well be exaggerated, and, the overall population estimates provided by Schippman, although useful, are little more than educated guesses. Moreover, they do not take into account the recent archaeological surveys conducted in the 1990s that demostrate a rather densely populated plateau... Overall, Schippmann contrasts his estimated population of 500,000 for the kingdom of Saba’ with a total estimated population of 1 million for the Indus civilization at its height..." [2] "Overall, it is sufficient to say that the Yemen plateau between Yarim and Sana’a and apparently to the north as well, was during the later first millennium BC and AD, very well populated with perhaps between 1 and 5 settlements per 100 km2. [2] [1]: (Burrows 2010, lxiii) Robert D Burrows. 2010. Historical Dictionary of Yemen. Second Edition. The Scarecrow Press, Inc. Lanham. [2]: (Wilkinson 2009, 58) Tony J Wilkinson. Environment and Long-Term Population Trends in Southwest Arabia. Michael D Petraglia. Jeffrey I Rose. eds. 2009. The Evolution of Human Populations in Arabia. Paleoenvironments, Prehistory and Genetics. Springer. Dordrecht. |
||||||
|
368,000/5 = 73,600
"Diodorus Siculus estimated 50,000-200,000 persons for tribes in Gaul; Caesar’s estimates ranged from the Helvetii at 263,000 to the Latovici at 14,000." [1] [2] Caesar might have been prone to exaggeration. Some idea for scale of tribal populations comes from Caesar at the time of his invasion of Gaul. Helvetii, Tulingi, Latobrigi, Rauraci and Boii wanted to move from Switzerland to South West Gaul. According to Caesar (c50 BCE) there were 368,000 in total. Another tribe, the Suebi numbered 120,000 people. [3] [1]: (Wells 1984:171) [2]: (Patterson 1995, 136) [3]: (Collis 2003, 107) |
||||||
|
For Egypt 2,000,000 to 2,500,000; 2.1 to 2 million for New Kingdom according to Hassan and Butzer
Egypt: 4.5m by the end of the New Kingdom. [1] Province of Nubia, 100,000. Palestine: 250,000. Egypt: 3m. [2] Egypt: outlier estimate of about 10 million inhabitants (experts suggest deleting/suppressing this). [3] Graph shows increase 2.0 - 3.0 million during New Kingdom. [4] 2.9 - 4.5 million for late New Kingdom. [5] [1]: (Stearns 2001, 30) [2]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 226) [5]: (O’Connor 1983, 190) O’Connor, David. "New Kingdom and Third Intermediate Period 1552-664 BC" in Trigger, B G. Kemp, B J. O’Connor, D. LLoyd, A B. 1983. Ancient Egypt: A Social History. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. |
||||||
|
7,000,000: 280-300 BCE 7,000,000 for the "total" Ptolemaic Empire. Unspecified date (presumably peak territory).
[1]
TC: figures below refer to Egypt specfically: 3,000,000-5,000,000 Egypt 100 BCE. Fischer-Bovet book is out in 2014 Clarysse and Thompson [2] offer an estimate (for Egypt) of around 2.8 mln which is based upon census figures. F. Hassan provides an estimate for Egypt which is also less than 3 mln. W. Scheidel prefers a number closer to 5 mln. Encyclopaedia Britannica 2011 gives 3.5 mln. ca. BCE 100. [3] C. Fischer-Bovet, "Counting the Greeks in Egypt. Immigration in the first century of Ptolemaic rule," in Demography in the Graeco-Roman World, ed. C. Holleran and A. Pudsey. Cambridge, 2011, pp. 135-54 reviews earlier estimations, and suggests a population in the Third century BC of 4 mln, with Greeks representing ca. 5% of the total. Korotaev and Khaltourina’s estimated population dynamics of Egypt 300-1900 CE. [4] Korotaev and Khaltourina’s data (Egypt only)300 BCE: 3,000,000200 BCE: 4,000,000100 BCE: 2,500,0001 CE: 3,500,000 [1]: (Fischer-Bovet 2008, 149[1]) [2]: W. Clarysse and D. Thompson, Counting the People in Hellenistic Egypt. Cambridge, 2006 [3]: http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/180468/ancient-Egypt/22341/The-Ptolemaic-dynasty?anchor=ref936466 [4]: (Korotaev and Khaltourina 2006, 38) |
||||||
|
People. In this period Crete was divided into regional city-states that controlled well-defined regions.
[1]
[2]
’For Crete, [Hansen and Nielsen] make a quick calculation: having said that there were 49 contemporary cities in Crete, and the island having 8200 km2, the average territory of a Cretan city was of 167km2’.
[3]
Expert input may be needed to suggest a population estimate for a typical Archaic Cretan city-state.
[1]: Willetts, R. F. 1965. Ancient Crete. A Social History, London and Toronto, 56-75 [2]: Lembesi, A. 1987. "Η Κρητών Πολιτεία," in Panagiotakis, N. (ed.), Κρήτη: Ιστορία και Πολιτισμός, Heraklion, 166-72. [3]: (Coutsinas 2013) Nadia Coutsinas. 2013. "The Establishment of the City-States of Eastern Crete from the Archaic to the Roman Period." CHS Research Bulletin 2 (1). http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:hlnc.essay:CoutsinasN.The_Establishment_of_the_City-States_of_Eastern_Crete.2013. Coutsinas is citing An Inventory of Archaic and Classical Poleis by Mogens Herman Hansen and Thomas Heine Nielsen (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004). |
||||||
|
people. Estimates for the population of the whole island vary between 200,000 and 1,000,000 people. The most likely estimate, however, is that of 450,000 - 500,000 people.
[1]
The range coded here was arrived at by dividing the 200,000-1,000,000 range among the 35-40 city-states that occupied Classical Crete.
[2]
[1]: Chaniotis, A. 1897. "Κλασική και Ελληνιστική Κρήτη," in Panagiotakis, N. (ed.), Κρήτη: Ιστορία και Πολιτισμός, Heraklion, 194-95. [2]: Sanders, I. F. 1982. Roman Crete. An Archaeological Survey and Gazetteer of Late Hellenistic, Roman and Early Byzantine Crete, Warminister, 11. |
||||||
|
people. Firth estimated the Cretan population during Late Minoan IIIA and IIIB periods (1400-1200 BCE) as 110,000.
[1]
There are not estimates for the Final Post Palatial Period; settlement patterns, however, points to a considerable population decrease especially during 1100-1000 BCE.
[2]
[3]
Moreover, during this period Crete was divided up into many small, independent political units.
[4]
Expert input may be needed to suggest a figure for the typical population of one of these polities.
[1]: Firth, R. 1995."Estimating the population of Crete during LM IIIA/B," Minos 29-30, 33-55. [2]: Rehak, P. and Younger, J. G. 2001. "Neopalatial, Final palatial, and Postpalatial Crete," in Cullen, T. (ed.), Aegean Prehistory. A Review, Boston, 458 [3]: Borgna, E. 2003. "Regional settlement patterns in Crete at the end of LBA," SMEA 45, 153-83. [4]: Borgna, E. 2003. "Regional settlement patterns, exchange systems and sources of power in Crete at the ends of the Late Bronze Age: establishing a connection," SMEA 45, 153-83. |
||||||
|
people. Estimates for the population of the whole island vary between 200,000 and 1,000,000 people. The most likely estimate, however, is that of 450,000 - 500,000 people.
[1]
The range coded here was arrived at by dividing the 200,000-1,000,000 range among the 35-40 city-states that occupied Classical Crete.
[2]
[1]: Chaniotis, A. 1897. "Κλασική και Ελληνιστική Κρήτη," in Panagiotakis, N. (ed.), Κρήτη: Ιστορία και Πολιτισμός, Heraklion, 194-95. [2]: Sanders, I. F. 1982. Roman Crete. An Archaeological Survey and Gazetteer of Late Hellenistic, Roman and Early Byzantine Crete, Warminister, 11. |
||||||
|
Turkey-in-Asia contained 1.5 million by the chalcolithic (2500 BC) and 3 million "during the course of the full Bronze age".
[1]
If we assume 2 million for this period that is about 2.67 persons per KM2 across the whole area of Anatolia. Multiplied by the territory we could have a polity population range of between 50,000-100,000.
[1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 133) McEvedy, Colin. Jones, Richard. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books Ltd. London. |
||||||
|
People.
40,000-50,000 is a widely agreed upon number Milner estimates the American Bottom population ("population figures for Cahokia were doubled to approximate the inhabitants of all mound centers and added to valley-wide estimates for small settlements") in the Moorehead phase had fallen about 25% from the Stirling total. [1] Which was: "It is likely that at least 50,000 people lived within the 2000 square kilometer “greater Cahokia” region at its height (ca. A.D. 1100)." [2] "George Milner estimates that there were roughly 8000 people in the Cahokia central administrative complex and up to 50,000 in the greater Cahokia region after AD 1050. Before that the neither had large populations—perhaps less than 1000 people in the entire greater Cahokia region." However: "With new excavations at East St. Louis the estimate for the central administrative complex needs to be increased to something like 15,000." [3] [1]: (Milner 2006, 124) [2]: (Pauketat 2014, 15) [3]: (Peregrine/Pauketat 2014, 15) |
||||||
|
People.
Population of largest settlement probably in region of 500 people and this would be the quasi-polity size. This is an upper limit estimate. This population was not resident at the site that later became Cahokia. One of the areas with this number of people is called the Range site. After 700-800 CE maize cultivation lead to larger populations. [1] [1]: (Iseminger 2010, 26) Iseminger, W R. 2010. Cahokia Mounds: America’s First City. The History Press. Charleston. |
||||||
|
people. Rackham and Moody argued that the population of palatial Crete (Middle Minoan II-Late Minoan I or 1800-1450 BCE) was about 216,000-271,000.
[1]
For population estimates see also Branigan.
[2]
Expert input may be needed to produce a figure for the population of a typical regional polity in this period.
[1]: Rackham, O. and Moody, J. 1999. The Making of the Cretan Landscape, Manchester and New York, 97. [2]: Branigan, K. 2000. "Aspects of Minoan urbanism," in Branigan, K. (ed.), Urbanism in the Aegean Bronze Age (SSAA 4), Sheffield, 38-50. |
||||||
|
people. Rackham and Moody argued that the population of palatial Crete (Middle Minoan II-Late Minoan I or 1800-1450 BCE) was about 216,000-271,000.
[1]
For population estimates see also Branigan.
[2]
Expert input may be needed to produce a figure for the population of a typical regional polity in this period.
[1]: Rackham, O. and Moody, J. 1999. The Making of the Cretan Landscape, Manchester and New York, 97. [2]: Branigan, K. 2000. "Aspects of Minoan urbanism," in Branigan, K. (ed.), Urbanism in the Aegean Bronze Age (SSAA 4), Sheffield, 38-50. |
||||||
|
“Gomma, consisting mainly of a large undulating valley, with a population estimated in 1880 at about 15,000-16,000, produced the same crops as the other states.”
[1]
[1]: (Beckingham and Huntingford 1954, lxxx) Beckingham, C.F. and Huntingford, G.W.B. 1954. Some Records of Ethiopia, 1593-1646. London: Hakluyt Society. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/F86ZNREM/collection |
||||||
|
Estimate calculated using a range of [150,000-800,000] inhabitants for the whole archipelago divided into 4 polities.The 150,000-200,000 figure is implausible considering that all men, women, and children in the entire archipelago may only have numbered 250,000-300,000 at this time
[1]
. However, if higher estimates of the archipelago’s population (400,000, possibly more than 800,000
[2]
) are correct, perhaps the 1794 fleet really did contain 150,000-200,000 men.<br\“By the late seventeenth century, four main polities had emerged, focused on the main islands of Kaua’i, O’ahu, Maui, and Hawai’i, with the fought-over smaller islands being incorporated into one or another of the main units. However, the political dynamism of Hawai’i [the archipelago] in late prehistoric and early historic times emanated primarily from the two largest and youngest islands, Maui and Hawai’i….The Maui and Hawai’i chiefs coveted the generously endowed production systems based on irrigation that these western islands offered. Not long before Cook’s fateful visit in 1778-79, the Maui paramount Kahekili expanded his polity to encompass all of the islands to the west and was engaged in a fierce succession of wars with his arch-rival Kalani’ōpu’u of Hawai’i. After the fateful encounter with the West, Kalani’ōpu’u’s successor—the famous Kamehameha I—made shrewd use of Western arms to incorporate the entire archipelago under his hegemony.”
[3]
[1]: Kirch, P. V. 2010. How Chiefs Became Kings: Divine Kingship and the Rise of Archaic States in Ancient Hawai’i. Berkeley: University of California Press. Pg. 129. [2]: Kirch, P. V. 2010. How Chiefs Became Kings: Divine Kingship and the Rise of Archaic States in Ancient Hawai’i. Berkeley: University of California Press. Pg. 129-30. [3]: Kirch, P. V. 2000. On the Road of the Winds: An Archaeological History of the Pacific Islands Before European Contact. Berkeley: University of California Press. Pg. 300. |
||||||
|
People. ’The Iban are a riverine people, whose main areas of settlement in Sarawak are along the Saribas, Batang Lupar and Rejang river systems of the Second, Third, Sixth and Seventh Divisions. The 1985 census for Sarawak gives the Iban population at some 439,000 individuals which represents almost 30 percent of the total state population.’
[1]
’There were approximately 400,000 Iban in the state of Sarawak in 1989 (368,208 in 1980). Reliable figures for Kalimantan, the Indonesian part of the island, are unavailable.’
[2]
Detailed reliable figures are hard to obtain due to frequent migrations among Iban communities. For the early days of Brooke Raj rule and the first punitive expeditions, reliable demographic data are equally unavailable, given the superficial reach of Sultanate authority (see pre-colonial Iban sheet).
[1]: Davison, Julian, and Vinson H. Sutlive 1991. “Children Of Nising: Images Of Headhunting And Male Sexuality In Iban Ritual And Oral Literature”, 158 [2]: Vinson H. Sutlive, Jr. and John Beierle: eHRAF Cultural Summary for the Iban |
||||||
|
People.
Estimates for Indonesia (less West New Guinea): 2.8m in 700 CE, 3.0m in 800 CE, 3.4m in 900 CE, 3.75m in 1000 CE. [1] Majority of area of Indonesia at this time covered by Srivijaya.EXTERNAL_INLINE_LINK: http://www.zum.de/whkmla/region/seasia/xsrivijaya.html Total area of Indonesia (less West New Guinea) 1,500,000 km2. [1] Medang had about 10% of this area. On basis of area we could estimate for Medang: 280,000 in 700 CE, 300,000 in 800 CE, 340,000 in 900 CE, 375,000 in 1000 CE. [1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 196-201) McEvedy, Colin. Jones, Richard. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books Ltd. London. |
||||||
|
People. “Extrapolating from demographic data for the northern third of the Chaco region and from ranges of outlier community sizes, the Chaco region comprised perhaps 30,000 to 40,000 people, of whom only a few thousand at most resided in great houses. Chaco itself was a capital city, the seat of political power.”
[1]
[1]: (Lekson 2016: np) Lekson, Stephen H. 2016. “Chaco Canyon,” Colorado Encyclopedia, August 15, 2016, https://coloradoencyclopedia.org/article/chaco-canyon. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/JMISYRGX |
||||||
|
Inhabitant. Exact polity population figures have not been mentioned in the sources consulted. However, Wickham (1981) estimates that there may have been around 200,000 Lombards that migrated to Italy, who made up approximately 5-8% of the population of the region, while the remaining 92-95% were Romans.
[1]
Therefore it could be calculated from this that there were approximately four million inhabitants in the Lombard held territories of Italy.
[1]: Wickham 1981: 65. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/Z539DW5B |
||||||
|
People. ‘The Garo Hills were sparsely populated at the time the British came. According to Hunter, population of the Garo Hills was 80,000 in 1872; there was hardly any immigration and the hills were mostly populated by the Garos. Population went on increasing rapidly after that. In 1901 Garos were 74% of total population. It became 78% in 1951 and 85% in 1961 and 78.81% in 1971. High rate of growth of population is mainly due to population influx. What is of interest is, considerable influx of Garo population which is evident from the increasing proportion of the Garos in the total population.’
[1]
Numbers for the late 18th century are apparently unavailable, as we have assumed that no systematic censuses were taken prior to colonial rule. The population of a A’chik quasi-polity would accordingly have encompassed some villages or village-clusters rather than the whole hills area. The following information seems to refer to the present rather than the past: ’The population in a village ranges from 20 to 1,000 persons. The population density tends to decrease as one moves towards the interior areas from the urban areas of the districts. Villages are scattered and distant from one another in the interior areas. These villages are generally situated on the top of hillocks.’
[2]
The material provided in the ’settlement hierarchy’ section (see below) claims up to 300 houses for pre-colonial villages and a decrease in the mean size of village after colonial ’pacification’. Domestic units were large: ’The household is the primary production and consumption unit. A Garo household comprises parents, unmarried sons and daughters, a married daughter (heiress) with her husband and their children. In principle a married granddaughter and her children should be included, but in reality grandparents hardly exist to see their grandchildren married. Some households may--for short periods only--include distant relatives or non-related persons for various reasons.’ EXTERNAL_INLINE_REFERENCE: ;Roy, Sankar Kumar: eHRAF Cultural Summary for the Garo; We have hypothetically assumed 6 to 10 residents for a pre-colonial household. The code is accordingly provisional and open to re-evaluation.
[1]: Kar, Biman 1995. “Changing A’Chik-Mande: Need For Further Research”, 54 [2]: Roy, Sankar Kumar: eHRAF Cultural Summary for the Garo |
||||||
|
Expert dispute. Order of magnitude difference between high and low estimates. The high figure is partly supported by ancient accounts of large army sizes. If the ancient accounts of army sizes are all wild exaggerations then the lower figure could be realistic.
"The population of India during this period was somewhere between 120,000,000 to 180,000,000 people." [1] - note this figure is for the whole of India. Ganges basin perhaps 60% of total. In Ganges basin 15 million in 500 BC, 20 million in 200 BCE. [2] [15.5-181] Million. [3] the vast difference in estimates is based on the lack of evidence outside of archaeological evidence in excavated urban territories. [1]: (Gabriel 2002, 218) Gabriel, Richard A. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Greenwood Publishing Group. [2]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 182) McEvedy, Colin. Jones, Richard. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books Ltd. London. [3]: Estimate for the whole period 342-187 BCE. Clark, Peter, ed. The Oxford Handbook of Cities in World History. Oxford University Press, 2013. p. 159 |
||||||
|
People."In India the climate was quite congenial from 5th century BCE to 4th century CE, when Europe enjoyed a warmer phase. There was again as intensely cold phase in Europe from the 4th century - 10th century CE therefore it is inferred that India had an arid phase at that time (for details see Dhavalikar 2002)."
[1]
"The visible impact is - change in the pattern of settlements; change from urban (monetary) to more village-based economy; increase in land grants (minimizing cash transaction); probably the hardships and adverse conditions in life gave rise to propensity towards godly faith visibly resulted in large number of religious structures."
[1]
[1]: (Sawant 2009) Reshma Sawant. 2008. ‘State Formation Process In The Vidarbha During The Vakataka Period’. Bulletin of the Deccan College Post-Graduate and Research Institute 68-69: 137-162.< |
||||||
|
Adams mentions two settlement enclaves: southern and northern. The southern enclave was inhabited by 86300 people on area of 2398 in squared km and the northern enclave had 20240 people living on area of 1184 in squared km
[1]
100,000-200,000
[2]
Most of the population lived in the cites. According to Adams, 10% of the settlement was nonurban (occupying villages smaller than 10ha) and almost 78,4% settlement was large urban area (and had more than 40 ha) in the Early Dynastic Period II/III
[3]
[1]: (Adams 1981, 90) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/MAIAZJ3K. [2]: Peregrine 2002, 113 [3]: Adams 1981, 138 |
||||||
|
People. The researchers deeply believed that the north Ubaid was more populated than southern regions of Ubaid.
[1]
[2]
There are known some calculation regarding the size of populations inhabited some particular sites such as Tell al-Hawa (1500-4000 people, area of the site - 15-20 ha), Site 118 (500-1200 people; area of the site- 5-6 ha) and Khanijdal East (100-200 people, area of the site- 1ha). There are based on a range of on-site population densities of 100 to 200 people per ha.
[3]
[1]: Wilkinson 2000, 244. [2]: Carter & Philip 2010, 8. [3]: Wilkinson et al. 1996, 21 |
||||||
|
"In the Neo-Sumerian period, the population of Ur was ca. 200,000 people. Both this population increase and the urban improvements were largely supported by agricultural activities."
[1]
[1]: (Leverani 2014, 161) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London. |
||||||
|
People.
Population of largest settlement probably in region of 500 people and this would be the quasi-polity size. This is an upper limit estimate. This population was not resident at the site that later became Cahokia. One of the areas with this number of people is called the Range site. |
||||||
|
People. The population of England was around 1.5 million in 1086 when the Domesday Book was written, which is close enough to the end of our polity date to assume this is a fair approximation of the population during this period.
[1]
[1]: (Cantor 1982: 18) Cantor, Leonard. 2021. The English Medieval Landscape. London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003159384. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/DEXKYD2 |
||||||
|
People.
"At the height of its power in the sixteenth century, the city of Venice counted nearly 170,000 souls, with a population of more than two million in its subject territories." [1] "Venice and its environs had a population of five-hundred thousand". [2] "The Black Plague (1350-1425) carried off 35 to 65 percent of the rural and urban population of of Italy." [2] [1]: (Martin and Romano 2000, 1) John Martin. Dennis Romano. Reconsidering Venice. John Martin. Dennis Romano. eds. 2000. Venice Reconsidered: The History and Civilization of an Italian City-State 1297-1797. The Johns Hopkins University Press. Baltimore. [2]: (Ching and Jarzombek 2017, 457) Francis D K Ching. Mark M Jarzombek. 2017. A Global History of Architecture. Second Edition. John Wiley & Sons. |
||||||
|
People.“The size of the Horde’s population can be approximately calculated by a widely used method: the numerical strength of the army, known from the sources, is multiplied by 4 or 5. It is believed that upon full military mobilisation, some 3/4 or 4/5 of the total population of the nomads—women, children, feeble old men and horseless poor—stayed at home.”
[1]
Therefore the estimated population of the Golden Horde is around 400,000 – 600,000 inhabitants by the end of this period.
[2]
[1]: Khakimov and Favereau 2017: 829. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/QL8H3FN8 [2]: Trepavlov 2016: 427. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/PUGWXUCR |
||||||
|
People.
"Kobishchanov (1979: 122-5), in his discussion about Aksumite population ... the population of the whole Aksumite kingdom without Arabia and Nubia, was ’at the outside half a million’. This was presumably based on available archaeological evidence." [1] [1]: (Munro-Hay 1991, 166) Stuart C Munro-Hay. 1991. Aksum: An African Civilisation of Late Antiquity. Edinburgh University Press. |
||||||
|
This figure is from Black and predates the beginning date of the polity period.
[1]
ET: McEvedy and Jones estimate 12,000,000 for the whole of Italy in 1600 CE, an increase from the previous century. [2] We don’t know where this increase occurred although we do estimate that the population of Rome "boomed" in the 16th Century. However, this could be rebound after the depopulation that followed the sack of Rome 1527 CE, and may not represent a demographic trend as such. Even so, it was an impressive recovery despite the famines and plagues. We could use the figure again for this period as a rough guess. [1]: Black, 218 [2]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 107) |
||||||
|
People.
"The mound that rose from the Niger floodplain with the growth of Jenne-jeno did not stand alone. Indeed, it was surrounded by twenty-five smaller mounds, all within a distance of one kilometre, all occupied simultaneously. The total surface area of Jenne-jeno and its satellites was 69 hectares; the total population when most densely occupied approached 27,000." [1] "At its most densely populated (around AD 800) Jenne-jeno housed up to 27,000 people. [2] [1]: (Reader 1998, 230) [2]: (Reader 1998, 219) |
||||||
|
Merovingian kingdoms was a quasi-polity in terms of population that could be militarily controlled. This figure represents the average sized kingdom within the polity.
Total divided by six regions. [6,000,000-7,000,000] Estimated from below. Population of France [1] 400 CE = 5 500 CE = 4.75 600 CE = 4.5 700 CE = 4.75 800 CE = 5 Population of Belgium and Luxembourg [2] 400 CE = 0.3 500 CE = 0.3 600 CE = 0.3 700 CE = 0.3 800 CE = 0.3 Population of Netherlands [3] 400 CE = 0.2 500 CE = 0.2 600 CE = 0.2 700 CE = 0.2 800 CE = 0.2 Population of Germany [4] 400 CE = 3.5 500 CE = 3.25 600 CE = 3.0 700 CE = 3.0 800 CE = 3.25 Merovingian South West Germany. "activity radius of about 1km around early Neolithic settlements. This gives an area of slightly over 3 km2, of which 10 percent were fields and gardens. It was exploited by about 100 individuals (Kuster 1995:76-7). This implied a population density of about 30 inhabitants per km2. If we assume one settlement with about 200 inhabitants and some smaller settlements in one Gemarkung, we obtain a figure of 50-60 inhabitants per km2 for the Merovingian period." [5] [1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 57) McEvedy, C and Jones, R. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Allen Lane. London. [2]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 63) [3]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 65) [4]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 69) [5]: (Damminger in Wood ed. 1998, 69) |
||||||
|
Estiamte based on size of regional center + a few satellite villages
50 person per hectare, 30ha regional centre would have 1500 people. Could use a person-per-hectare estimate much higher than this but Mizoguchi says many regional centres exceeded the number of 200 inhabitants, which suggests lower densities. [1] The largest regional centres in this period are Karako and Ikegami-Sone that respectively have an extent of 30 and 25 hectares. 450,000: 250 CE an estimation of the population size in Japan between 300 BCE-700 CE was provided by Koyama [2] on the basis of his demographic study on the forty-seven-volume "National Site Maps" published by the Japanese government in 1965.During the Yayoi and Kofun periods around 16.8 % of Japan’s population lived in the Kansai region [3] The population size increased strongly from the Early Yayoi (ca. 300 BCE-100 BCE) period to the Late Yayoi period (ca. 100CE-300 CE). Different rates of annual growth’s local population and migrants have been estimated by scholars in order to assess how endogenous and exogenous factors shaped population size across time [4] [1]: K. Mizoguchi, 2013. The Archaeology of Japan. From the Earliest Rice Farming Villages to the Rise of the State. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 126. [2]: Koyama, S., 1978. Jomon Subsistence and Population. Senri Ethnological Studies 2. Osaka: National Museum of Ethnology [3]: Kidder, J. E., 2007. Himiko and Japan’s elusive chiefdom of Yamatai: archaeology, history, and mythology. University of Hawaii Press, 60. [4]: Hanihara, K., 1987. Estimation of the Number of Early Migrants to Japan: A Simulative Study. Journal of the Anthropological Society of Nippon 95, no. 3, 391-403. |
||||||
|
People. ‘The “Great Lake” supplied the water for irrigated rice cultivation and the fish protein to sustain the Khmer Empire’s population of more than 1 million.’
[1]
’Finally, during the late 1200s and 1300s Upper Burma, Angkor, and Dai Viet all suffered internal disorders and external attacks that eventually culminated in the sack of each capital and the collapse of central administration.40 These disorders derived from locally specific combinations of: a) eco- logical constraints, including shortages of quality land, which in turn reflected the combined effects of regional desiccation and a shift to more marginal lands after 200-300 years of sustained population growth; b) increased maritime trade that strengthened coastal principalities at the expense of the imperial heartlands in Upper Burma, Angkor, and Dong Kinh; c) Mongol incursions and more especially, large-scale Tai migrations; d) institutional features that conferred an excessive auton- omy on local power-holders. So severe was the ensuing fragmentation that by 1340, as noted, at least 23 mainland kingdoms were independent in the sense that they paid no regular tribute to other Southeast Asian rulers (see Figure 1.4).41 Most would survive into the 16th century.’
[2]
[1]: (Engelhardt 2005, p.20) [2]: (Lieberman 2003, p. 25) |
||||||
|
People.Population estimates for the HRE are not forthcoming in the sources and any that are available are labelled as guesswork.
[1]
The above figures are estimates based on partial data in the sources consulted. By the end of the Carolingian dynasty in 887 CE, the empire had a population of around 20 million.
[2]
In 1300 the estimated population of the Empire was: Germany – 14 million, Italy - 7.5 million, Hungary and Slavic states – 10.5 million, but this is missing some significant territories such as France and Bohemia.
[3]
However, the total Empire population was again only 20 million in 1700, so the figure of 21,500,000 for 1300, prior to the Black Death devastating Europe’s population may well be close to correct. Churches, cathedrals, abbeys, chapels and other places of worship were present across the Empire.
[4]
The overall population figure for the whole of Europe has been estimated at 38.5 million in 1000 CE, and 73.5 million at 1340 CE.
[1]
Further calculations and research will be needed to have a more accurate figure.
[1]: Power 2006: 57. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/4V4WE3ZK. [2]: Wilson 2016: 320. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/N5M9R9XA [3]: Wilson 2016: 490. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/N5M9R9XA [4]: Wilson 2016: 496. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/N5M9R9XA |
||||||
|
People, per Phoenician city-state. Unfortunately, due to the difficulties in excavating the Phoenician cities, there appear to be no good estimates for the populations for each polity. Markoe (2000:196) tentatively suggests that by the 4th Century BCE, Tyre’s population "may have reached forty thousand, if one accepts Arrian’s testimony concerning the number of soldiers slain and inhabitants sold into slavery at the time of Alexander’s siege." Diodorus reported that over 40,000 people in Sidon were killed when Artaxerxes III captured the city in 351 BCE, with an unspecified number of survivors sold into slavery. Yet enough people remained for Sidon to recover as a thriving metropolis within only a few years.
[1]
One might suppose that at least ten thousand Sidonians remained after Artaxerxes’ depredations. Tyre and Sidon were, of course, the leading cities of Phoenicia, giving us little to work with when estimating the size of the other cities. Arwad, in the second rank of Phoenician polities, was on an island of some 40 hectares; according to the "conventional" (and questionable) rule of thumb of 250 inhabitants per built-up hectare,
[2]
this would indicate some 10,000 inhabitants. However, classical sources indicate that the island was densely populated, with strong fortifications and an urban core with multi-story buildings.
[3]
We can likely double the initial estimate, in my view.
[1]: Markoe (2000:60-61). [2]: Cf. Zorn (1994). [3]: Markoe (2000:205-206). |
||||||
|
People. 1591-1618: no data. [2,000,000-3,000,000]: 1554-1591 CE; [2,000,000-3,000,000]: 1618-1659 CE. The figure of 3 million inhabitants corresponds to the earliest available population estimate for Morocco: this estimate dates to the early twentieth century, but "[t]he figure can hardly have been higher in the late sixteenth century or during the seventeenth, given that the country was subject to regular and devastating epidemics of plague"
[1]
. The population must have risen with the annexation of the Niger Inland Delta, but no demographic data could be found regarding the latter.
[1]: M. García-Arenal, Ahmad Al-Mansur: The beginnings of modern Morocco (2009), p. 41 |
||||||
|
People. According to the most up-to-date estimate. "Archaeologists shrink (with justification) from making population estimates; let us just guess at a low-end figure of 10,000 to 26,000 people in Jenne-jeno and the 1-kilometer radius satellites (see below) by AD 800 (S. McIntosh 1995: 395)."
[1]
.
"The mound that rose from the Niger floodplain with the growth of Jenne-jeno did not stand alone. Indeed, it was surrounded by twenty-five smaller mounds, all within a distance of one kilometre, all occupied simultaneously. The total surface area of Jenne-jeno and its satellites was 69 hectares; the total population when most densely occupied approached 27,000." [2] "At its most densely populated (around AD 800) Jenne-jeno housed up to 27,000 people. [3] [1]: (McIntosh 2006, 175) Roderick McIntosh. 2006. “Ancient Middle Niger”. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [2]: (Reader 1998, 230) [3]: (Reader 1998, 219) |
||||||
|
People.
40-50 million [1] -- check (is reference correct? was it 4-5 million?). Reference checked, it was stated. However, it might be a typographical error. Population of Mali in 1960 was 5 million. No references in literature to massive population crash or genocide in the region between middle ages and 1960. McEvedy and Jones have the region of "The Sahel States" (Mauritania, Mali, Niger and Chad) at 2 million in 1000 CE, rising slowly to 3 million in 1500 CE. [2] Sahel states = Mauritania, Mali, Niger, Chad 2m by AD 1000 "Before the introduction of agriculture and animal husbandry the population of the area of the present-day Sahel states is unlikely to have exceeded 50,000: once pastoralism and agriculture had become well-established the population can hardly have been less than half a million. The chronology of the transition is as yet totally obscure, but there is no reason to postulate anything above the 50,000 line before 3000 BC or place the achievement of the half million later than 1000 BC. From this latter point a low rate of increase is all that is needed to bring the total to 1m by AD 1 and 2m by AD 1000." [3] [1]: (Niane 1984, 156) [2]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 239) McEvedy, Colin. Jones, Richard. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books Ltd. London. [3]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 238) McEvedy, Colin. Jones, Richard. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books Ltd. London. |
||||||
|
People.
According to Google Mali’s population was 5 million in 1960. What was the population in 1700? An estimate of 2 million would be order of magnitude correct. |
||||||
|
People. This is a very rough estimate based on the number of households with between four and seven individuals per household. Pre-Angkor inscriptions from the delta mention several pura: Tamandarapura, Samudrapura, Svargadvarapura, and over 20 pura outside the delta. The Chinese Sui Shu says that in the early seventh century Funan had 30 enclosed settlements with at least 1,000 households each.’Pre-Angkor inscriptions from the delta mention several pura: Tamandarapura, Samudrapura, Svargadvarapura, and over 20 pura outside the delta. The Chinese Sui Shu says that in the early seventh century Funan had 30 enclosed settlements with at least 1,000 households each.’
[1]
[1]: (Miksic 2007, p. 125) |
||||||
|
People.
McEvedy and Jones (1978) estimates for 900 CE: Egypt 4.5m; Palestine and Jordan 0.5m; Syria and the Lebanon 1.5m. Total: 6.5m. [1] 963-969 CE poor harvests and famine. [2] [1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978) McEvedy C and Jones R. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Allen Lane. London. [2]: (Sundelin 2013, 430-431) Shillington, K. 2013. Encyclopedia of African History: Volume 3. Routledge. |
||||||
|
Between 2564-3846 people.
Calculations are based on the level 2B of Canhasan I, and the assumption that in each of the buildings, a family with about 5 persons resided [1] Çatalhöyük West: 8 ha; Canhasan I: 9ha; Yümüktepe/ Mersin: 12ha; Tepecik - Çiftlik: 6 ha; Köşk Höyük:4 ha [2] [3] [1]: During Bleda S., Constructing Communities. Clustered Neigbourhood Settlements of the Cental Anatolia Neolithic CA. 8500-5500 Cal. BC. 2006, p. 278 [2]: Düring Bleda S., 2010. The prehistory of Asia Minor. From complex hunter-gatherers to early urban societies.,Cambridge University Press, p. 138-139 [3]: Sharp Joukowsky Martha, 1996. Early Turkey Anatolian archaeology from prehistory through the Lydian Period., Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company USA, p. 108 |
||||||
|
People. "In that multinational state the Khitan nomads (core - metropolis of nomadic empire) made up only a fifth of the population (750 thousand people). In addition to them the empire embraced the agricultural Chinese - over one half of the population (2,400 thousand people), the Bohai (450 thousand people), the non-Khitan (the so-called “barbarian”) hunter and nomadic (200 thousand people) tribes. The total number of the Empire’s population was 3,800 thousand people (Wittfogel, Feng 1949: 58)."
[1]
[1]: (Kradin 2014, 152) |
||||||
|
People. 1.5 million is the code for the Imperial Xiongnu Confederation which appears to still stand for this period, although I have changed it to a range from 1-1.5 million to reflect some loss of control.
"Before 50 B.C., the Xiongnu split into a northern and southern polity. Both remained well organized and expansionistic at first, but eventually the southern Xiongnu (estimated at 200,000 people) became a vassal state of the Han Chinese, and by A.D. 150 their political control was virtually nonexistent." [1] "Despite the fact that the population of Han China, according to a census taken during the middle of the dynasty, has been counted at about 60 million people as compared to the total population of nomads north of China, which is postulated as not reaching 1.5 million people, the Xiongnu still managed to withstand, and parlay on equal terms with, the Qin and Han dynasties." [2] [1]: (Rogers 2012, 222) [2]: (Kradin 2011, 77) |
||||||
|
People. "The Zünghar principality included the Zünghars, Dörböds, Khoshuds, and Khoids (with some attached Torghuds) and is said to have numbered 200,000 households. From this time until 1771 the Oirats remained powerful players in Inner Asian politics."
[1]
With an estimate of 3-8 people per household, the population would be in the range of 600,000-1,600,000 people. (AD’s guess) [1]: (Atwood 2004, 421) |
||||||
|
People.
Territory of "Gana" in 1000 CE included the Inland Delta region of Mali from Timbuktu to the tributaries/uplands, the eastern half of Mauritania and part of eastern Senegal. [1] We need an estimate of the population within this region. Using the McEvedy and Jones figure of 2 million by 1000 CE for the "Sahel States" (Mauritania, Mali, Niger, Chad) I will estimate about 1-1.5 million. "Before the introduction of agriculture and animal husbandry the population of the area of the present-day Sahel states is unlikely to have exceeded 50,000: once pastoralism and agriculture had become well-established the population can hardly have been less than half a million. The chronology of the transition is as yet totally obscure, but there is no reason to postulate anything above the 50,000 line before 3000 BC or place the achievement of the half million later than 1000 BC. From this latter point a low rate of increase is all that is needed to bring the total to 1m by AD 1 and 2m by AD 1000." Sahal states 2.2m 1100 CE, 2.4m 1200 CE, 2.6m 1300 CE, 2.8m 1400 CE, 3m 1500 CE 3.5m 1600 CE. [2] [1]: (Konemann et al 2010, 302 Atlas Historica, Editions Place des Victories. Paris.) [2]: (McEverdy and Jones 1978, 238) |
||||||
|
People. It has been estimated that there were over 1000 people living at San José Mogote during this period.
[1]
The entire valley had an estimated population of around 2000 persons divided among 40 communities in the San Jose phase (1150-850 BCE) and 2000-2500 persons during the Guadalupe phase (850-700 BCE), but were not integrated into one polity at this time.
[2]
Estimate total population Oaxaca Valley at 2,000 for 1000 BCE.
[3]
"Table 11.3. Population in the largest centers, by phase, in Oaxaca and Ejutla."
[4]
Valley of Oaxaca population (Largest center in Oaxaca): Tierras Largas: 327 (128); San Jose: 1942 (1384); Guadalupe: 1788 (774); Rosario: 1835 (564); Early I: 14652 (5250); Late I: 51339 (17242); Monte Alban II: 41927 (14492); Monte Alban IIIA: 120121 (16507); Monte Alban IIIB: 78930 (24189); Monte Alban IV: 77612 (16117); Monte Alban V: 166467 (13831).
[4]
[1]: Flannery, K. V. and J. Marcus (2005). Excavations at San José Mogote 1: The Household Archaeology, University of Michigan Museum, p11 [2]: Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. p106, 112 [3]: (Blanton, Feinman, Kowalewski, Nicholas 1999, 35) Blanton, Richard E. Feinman, Gary M. Kowalewski, Stephen A. Nicholas, Linda M. 1999. Ancient Oaxaca. The Monte Alban State. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. [4]: (Feinman and Nicholas 2013, 183) Gary M Feinman. Linda M Nicholas. 2013. Settlement Patterns of the Ejutla Valley, Oaxaca, Mexico: A Diachronic Macroscale Perspective. Fieldiana Anthropology, 43(1):1-330. 2013. Field Museum of Natural History. URL: http://www.bioone.org/doi/full/10.3158/0071-4739-43.00.1 |
||||||
|
People.
Estimate for the area in and around Montel Alban 8,000-10,000: Although it is unlikely that all the settlements of the valley were unified (based on the divisions between populations of the different arms of the valley seen in the Rosario phase), the area in and around Monte Albán was the most densely populated. In the absence of a more accurate polity population estimate, the lower population estimate of 8,000-10,000 people given by Flannery and Marcus [1] is used as a very rough proxy for the Monte Albán polity population. 8,000-15,000: There is a large range of population estimates for the valley during this period, from roughly 8,000 to 15,000. [1] [2] Estimate for Monte Alban Early I sites in Valley of Oaxaca subareas Table 3.5. Monte Alban Early I sites in Valley of Oaxaca subareas. Table lists sites in sub-areas and includes total population for each of them. [3] Etla: 3175; Central (contains Monte Alban): 6793; N Valle Grande: 1998; S Valle Grande: 526; W Tlacolula: 1814; E Tlacolula: 341; Ejutla: 259; Albarradas: 59; Sola: 12. [3] Monte Alban’s population grew quickly to 5,000. [3] Monte Alban’s population + population of this list of subareas = 19,977 "Table 11.3. Population in the largest centers, by phase, in Oaxaca and Ejutla." [4] Valley of Oaxaca population (Largest center in Oaxaca): Tierras Largas: 327 (128); San Jose: 1942 (1384); Guadalupe: 1788 (774); Rosario: 1835 (564); Early I: 14652 (5250); Late I: 51339 (17242); Monte Alban II: 41927 (14492); Monte Alban IIIA: 120121 (16507); Monte Alban IIIB: 78930 (24189); Monte Alban IV: 77612 (16117); Monte Alban V: 166467 (13831). [4] [1]: Flannery, K. V. and J. Marcus (2003). "The origin of war: New C-14 dates from ancient Mexico." Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 100(20): 11801-11805, p11804 [2]: Feinman, G. M., et al. (1985). "Long-term demographic change: A perspective from the valley of Oaxaca, Mexico." Journal of Field Archaeology 12(3): 333-362, p346 [3]: (Feinman and Nicholas 2017, 31) Gary M Feinman. Linda M Nicholas. 2017. Settlement Patterns in the Albarradas Area of Highland Oaxaca, Mexico: Frontiers, Boundaries, and Interaction. Fieldiana Anthropology, 46(1):1-162. Publication 1572. Field Museum of Natural History. URL: http://www.bioone.org/doi/full/10.3158/0071-4739-46.1.1 [4]: (Feinman and Nicholas 2013, 183) Gary M Feinman. Linda M Nicholas. 2013. Settlement Patterns of the Ejutla Valley, Oaxaca, Mexico: A Diachronic Macroscale Perspective. Fieldiana Anthropology, 43(1):1-330. 2013. Field Museum of Natural History. URL: http://www.bioone.org/doi/full/10.3158/0071-4739-43.00.1 |
||||||
|
People.
"Table 4.1. Monte Alban II sites in Valley of Oaxaca subareas." [1] Etla: 8,237; Central (includes Monte Alban): 18694; N Valle Grande: 5039; S Valle Grande: 2072; W Tlacolula: 5404; E Tlacolula: 2475; Ejutla: 2184; Albarradas: 2028; Sola: 833. [1] Total: 46,966 100 BCE-200 CE about 45,000. [2] The Settlement Pattern Project estimates a decline in population by up to 32% (from roughly 50,000) during this period, based on the abandonment or shrinkage of some settlements (even though this was in part due to the nucleation of the population at larger centres such as Monte Albán). [3] Marcus and Flannery (1996) however, suggest that this perceived diminishment in population is in part due to the very high estimates given by the Settlement Pattern Project for the previous phase. [4] The polity population has therefore been coded as a rough range, taking these two views into account. "Table 11.3. Population in the largest centers, by phase, in Oaxaca and Ejutla." [5] Valley of Oaxaca population (Largest center in Oaxaca): Tierras Largas: 327 (128); San Jose: 1942 (1384); Guadalupe: 1788 (774); Rosario: 1835 (564); Early I: 14652 (5250); Late I: 51339 (17242); Monte Alban II: 41927 (14492); Monte Alban IIIA: 120121 (16507); Monte Alban IIIB: 78930 (24189); Monte Alban IV: 77612 (16117); Monte Alban V: 166467 (13831). [5] [1]: (Feinman and Nicholas 2017, 55) Gary M Feinman. Linda M Nicholas. 2017. Settlement Patterns in the Albarradas Area of Highland Oaxaca, Mexico: Frontiers, Boundaries, and Interaction. Fieldiana Anthropology, 46(1):1-162. Publication 1572. Field Museum of Natural History. URL: http://www.bioone.org/doi/full/10.3158/0071-4739-46.1.1 [2]: (Blanton, Feinman, Kowalewski, Nicholas 1999, 110) Blanton, Richard E. Feinman, Gary M. Kowalewski, Stephen A. Nicholas, Linda M. 1999. Ancient Oaxaca. The Monte Alban State. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. [3]: Blanton, R. E., et al. (1979). "Regional evolution in the Valley of Oaxaca, Mexico." Journal of Field Archaeology 6(4): 369-390, p379 [4]: Marcus, J. and K. V. Flannery (1996). Zapotec civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley, Thames and Hudson London, p172-3 [5]: (Feinman and Nicholas 2013, 183) Gary M Feinman. Linda M Nicholas. 2013. Settlement Patterns of the Ejutla Valley, Oaxaca, Mexico: A Diachronic Macroscale Perspective. Fieldiana Anthropology, 43(1):1-330. 2013. Field Museum of Natural History. URL: http://www.bioone.org/doi/full/10.3158/0071-4739-43.00.1 |
||||||
|
[72,416-158,040] People is the estimated population of the entire Valley of Oaxaca during this period, but the population of the Zapotec polity (including those not living in the valley) is not known.
[1]
Marcus and Flannery
[2]
estimate the population of the valley to have been around 115,000 persons during the IIIA period.
"Table 5.7. Estimated archaeological, resource-based, and labor-based potential populations for Valley of Oaxaca subareas in Monte Alban IIIA." [3] Etla: 5492; Central: 18322; N Valle Grande: 28118; S Valle Grande: 23995; W Tlacolula: 29171; Ejutla: 14656; Albarradas: 1127; Sola: 7678. [3] Total: 128,559. "Table 11.3. Population in the largest centers, by phase, in Oaxaca and Ejutla." [4] Valley of Oaxaca population (Largest center in Oaxaca): Tierras Largas: 327 (128); San Jose: 1942 (1384); Guadalupe: 1788 (774); Rosario: 1835 (564); Early I: 14652 (5250); Late I: 51339 (17242); Monte Alban II: 41927 (14492); Monte Alban IIIA: 120121 (16507); Monte Alban IIIB: 78930 (24189); Monte Alban IV: 77612 (16117); Monte Alban V: 166467 (13831). [4] [1]: Kowalewski, S. A. and R. D. Drennan (1989). Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Tlacolula, Etla, and Ocotlan, the Valley of Oaxaca, Mexico, Regents of the University of Michigan, the Museum of Anthropology, p756 [2]: Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. p224 [3]: (Feinman and Nicholas 2017, 81) Gary M Feinman. Linda M Nicholas. 2017. Settlement Patterns in the Albarradas Area of Highland Oaxaca, Mexico: Frontiers, Boundaries, and Interaction. Fieldiana Anthropology, 46(1):1-162. Publication 1572. Field Museum of Natural History. URL: http://www.bioone.org/doi/full/10.3158/0071-4739-46.1.1 [4]: (Feinman and Nicholas 2013, 183) Gary M Feinman. Linda M Nicholas. 2013. Settlement Patterns of the Ejutla Valley, Oaxaca, Mexico: A Diachronic Macroscale Perspective. Fieldiana Anthropology, 43(1):1-330. 2013. Field Museum of Natural History. URL: http://www.bioone.org/doi/full/10.3158/0071-4739-43.00.1 |
||||||
|
People. Sanders et al. (1979) tentatively estimated that there were approx. 5,000 people in the Basin of Mexico at the end of the Early Formative Period c.1150 BC, and approx. 25,000 people in the Basin of Mexico at the end of the Middle Formative Period c.650 BC.
[1]
These estimates are "tentative" because they involve numerous arbitrary estimations. Not only were non-surveyed areas’ populations guessed at, but Early and Middle Formative cermaics were mis-diagnosed in the BOM archaeological surveys, and subsequent re-evaluations of the survey ceramic collections by Tolstoy indicated that numerous Early Formative sites were embedded within Middle Formative sites (but their physical extent was no longer calculable).
[2]
[3]
Revisions of the Formative survey data based on Tolstoy’s findings have not been published. Additionally, Tolstoy, Fish, and Niederberger have found a poor correspondence between subsurface remains and surface scatters’ density and extent, leading to systematic underestimation of Formative sites’ areas and populations.
[4]
[5]
[6]
[1]: Sanders, William T., Jeffrey R. Parsons, and Robert S. Santley. (1979) The Basin of Mexico: Ecological Processes in the Evolution of a Civilization. Academic Press, New York, pg. 183. [2]: Tolstoy, Paul, Suzanne K. Fish, Martin W. Boksenbaum, Kathryn Blair Vaughn and C. Earle Smith. (1977). "Early Sedentary Communities of the Basin of Mexico." Journal of Field Archaeology, 4(1): 91-106. [3]: Tolstoy, Paul. (1975) "Settlement and Population Trends in the Basin of Mexico (Ixtapaluca and Zacatenco Phases)" Journal of Field Archaeology, 2(4): 331-349. [4]: Paul Tolstoy. (1989) "Coapexco and Tlatilco: sites with Olmec material in the Basin of Mexico", In Regional Perspectives on the Olmec, Robert J. Sharer & David C. Grove (eds.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pg. 87-121. [5]: Tolstoy, Paul and Suzanne K. Fish. (1975) "Surface and Subsurface Evidence for Community Size at Coapexco, Mexico." Journal of Field Archaeology, 2(1/2): 97-104 [6]: Niederberger, Christine. (2000) "Ranked Societies, Iconographic Complexity, and Economic Wealth in the Basin of Mexico Toward 1200 BC." In Olmec Art and Archaeology in Mesoamerica, edited by John E. Clark and Mary E. Pye. New Haven: Yale University Press, pp. 169-192. |
||||||
|
people. Previously coded as [71-340] people, based on the following reasoning: As sources do not suggest there is evidence for a widespread unified polity during this period, the population estimate of the largest settlement (San José Mogote) has been coded here.
[1]
The population of the whole Valley of Oaxaca has been estimated at 463-935 people, who were mainly concentrated in the Etla arm (~52% of the population)
[1]
[2]
"Table 11.3. Population in the largest centers, by phase, in Oaxaca and Ejutla."
[3]
Valley of Oaxaca population (Largest center in Oaxaca): Tierras Largas: 327 (128).
[3]
[1]: Flannery, K. V. and J. Marcus (2005). Excavations at San José Mogote 1: The Household Archaeology, University of Michigan Museum, p7 [2]: Feinman, G. M., et al. (1985). "Long-term demographic change: A perspective from the valley of Oaxaca, Mexico." Journal of Field Archaeology 12(3): 337. [3]: (Feinman and Nicholas 2013, 183) Gary M Feinman. Linda M Nicholas. 2013. Settlement Patterns of the Ejutla Valley, Oaxaca, Mexico: A Diachronic Macroscale Perspective. Fieldiana Anthropology, 43(1):1-330. 2013. Field Museum of Natural History. URL: http://www.bioone.org/doi/full/10.3158/0071-4739-43.00.1 |
||||||
|
Cuzco: 15,000?
Cuzco valley: 10,000-20,000. According to a Spanish source in mid 16th century, valley held over 20,000 [1] "There were many other settlements in the Lucre area; some of them, such as Minaspata and Coto-coto, were almost as large as Choquepukio (Dwyer 1971: 41; Glowacki 2002: 271). Since those towns likely housed several thousand people each, the populace collectively posed an ongoing challenge to Inca hegemony. Sarmiento’s (2007: 87, 96, 99) informants said that four successive Inca rulers - from Inka Roca to Pachakuti - all took up arms against them, but only the last was able to finally subjugate and then disperse them. Because of the extended animosities, it is no surprise that the Oropesa area that lay between them was an unoccupied buffer zone for much of the early era (Bauer and Covey 2004: 84-7)." [2] The possibly allied site of Cotocotuyoc was 45 ha. [3] If the three main towns had several thousand inhabitants each, we can infer that the Lucre confederation had at least 10,000 inhabitants. [1]: (Bauer 2004, 189, 227) [2]: (D’Altroy 2014, 81-82) [3]: (Glowacki 2002, 271) |
||||||
|
Lysimachus’ kingdom covered approximately 50% of modern Turkey and all of Bulgaria.
Turkey as a whole had an estimated 4.5 million in 300 BCE. [1] Turkey-in-Europe had about 100,000 in 300 BCE. [2] Bulgaria had approximately 200,000 in 300 BCE. [2] [1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 135) McEvedy, Colin. Jones, Richard. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books Ltd. London. [2]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 113) McEvedy, Colin. Jones, Richard. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books Ltd. London. |
||||||
|
People.
Turkey contained 3 million "during the course of the full Bronze age". [1] The polity territory isn’t anywhere near 750,000 km2 of Anatolia. At greatest extent according to map [2] possessed about one third, which if equally distributed would be 1 million people. We could suppose this is a lower limit if the developed Hittite region was the most densely populated part of Anatolia. Territory also contains part of Syria which may have had 250,000 by 3000 BCE and 600,000 by 1000 BCE. [1] If we grant 300,000 for Syrian possessions the total baseline for our range estimate is about 1,300,000. [1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 133) McEvedy, Colin. Jones, Richard. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books Ltd. London. [2]: geacron.com |
||||||
|
Turkey-in-Asia had 5,500,000 in 100 BCE.
[1]
Cappadocia had only about one sixth of the land area of this region (756,816/130,000). If we divided the estimate of 5.5 million by six get about 900,000. The state was landlocked and had no port. One might expect the most populous cities in Anatolia to be outside Cappadocia on the coast. A figure of 900,000 would certainly be an upper limit. Three hundred years later, under Emperor Valerian, the province of Cappadocia was reported to have had 400,000.
[2]
This seems a more reasonable figure given Cappadocia’s location. Anatolia at the time of Valerian had about 6.5 million more people
[1]
- 1 million more than in 100 BCE - which means Cappadocia may have had only a sixteenth of the Turkey-in-Asia population. If we apply the same ratio to 100 BCE we get 350,000.
[1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 134) McEvedy, Colin. Jones, Richard. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books Ltd. London. [2]: (Smith ed. 1869, 469) Smith, William. ed. 1869. Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography, Volume 1. James Walton. |
||||||
|
5-6 million in Turkey-in-Asia at this time.
[1]
However, the polity covered only 40% of the land area and possibly not the most densely populated area because it was landlocked. 2,400,000 would be just above the upper limit for a range so perhaps 1.5-2 million.
[1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 135) McEvedy, Colin. Jones, Richard. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books Ltd. London. |
||||||
|
People. Rough estimate based on the following. "On a classificatory continuum the Limba and Kuranko polities were structurally more akin to political organizations sometimes classed as “simple chiefdoms,” with a slightly greater degree of centralization emerging among the Yalunka in the nineteenth century (Fried 1967; also see de Barros this volume; Johnson andEarle 2000; Service 1975:74–80, 104–64). Simple chiefdoms (following Fried 1967) are characterized by a principal settlement surrounded by smaller villages, with a total population in the thousands."
[1]
[1]: (DeCorse 2012: 285) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/7FGSKCDI/collection. |
||||||
|
People.
40,000-50,000 is a widely agreed upon number Milner estimates the American Bottom population ("population figures for Cahokia were doubled to approximate the inhabitants of all mound centers and added to valley-wide estimates for small settlements") in the Moorehead phase had fallen about 25% from the Stirling total. [1] Which was: "It is likely that at least 50,000 people lived within the 2000 square kilometer “greater Cahokia” region at its height (ca. A.D. 1100)." [2] "George Milner estimates that there were roughly 8000 people in the Cahokia central administrative complex and up to 50,000 in the greater Cahokia region after AD 1050. Before that the neither had large populations—perhaps less than 1000 people in the entire greater Cahokia region." However: "With new excavations at East St. Louis the estimate for the central administrative complex needs to be increased to something like 15,000." [3] [1]: (Milner 2006, 124) [2]: (Pauketat 2014, 15) [3]: (Peregrine/Pauketat 2014, 15) |
||||||
|
People. The admission of the Tuscarora added additional people and territory to the League. The Britannica provides a number of around 12,000 for the 18th century: ’For a century and a quarter before the American Revolution, the Iroquois stood athwart the path from Albany to the Great Lakes, keeping the route from permanent settlement by the French and containing the Dutch and the English. In the 18th century the Six Nations remained consistent and bitter enemies of the French, who were allied with their traditional foes. The Iroquois became dependent on the British in Albany for European goods (which were cheaper there than in Montreal), and thus Albany was never attacked. The Iroquois’ success in maintaining their autonomy vis-à-vis both the French and English was a remarkable achievement for an aboriginal people that could field only 2,200 men from a total population of scarcely 12,000. During the American Revolution, a schism developed among the Iroquois. The Oneida and Tuscarora espoused the American cause, while the rest of the league, led by Chief Joseph Brant’s Mohawk loyalists, fought for the British out of Niagara, decimating several isolated American settlements. The fields, orchards, and granaries, as well as the morale of the Iroquois, were destroyed in 1779 when U.S. Major General John Sullivan led a retaliatory expedition of 4,000 Americans against them, defeating them near present-day Elmira, New York. Having acknowledged defeat in the Second Treaty of Fort Stanwix (1784), the Iroquois Confederacy effectively came to an end. In a treaty that was made at Canandaigua, New York, 10 years later, the Iroquois and the United States each pledged not to disturb the other in lands that had been relinquished or reserved. Of the Six Nations, the Onondaga, Seneca, and Tuscarora remained in New York, eventually settling on reservations; the Mohawk and Cayuga withdrew to Canada; and, a generation later, a large group of the Oneida departed for Wisconsin.’
[1]
Population growth may have occurred during the reservation period.
[1]: http://www.britannica.com/topic/Iroquois-Confederacy |
||||||
|
“Although censuses were taken by the monarchy before 1930 for the purpose of taxation, no records seem to have survived. Jimma’s population otherwise has never been counted or even guessed at on any solid basis. Cardinal Massaja, in 1861, declared that Jimma had 150,000 inhabitants. The Italian Guida dell’ Africa Orientale Italiana estimated Jimma’s population at 300,000 in 1936.”
[1]
These are not conclusive or definitive numbers, but provide an estimate into what population numbers there were like.
[1]: (Lewis 2001, 48) Lewis, Herbert S. 2001. Jimma Abba Jifar, an Oromo Monarchy: Ethiopia, 1830-1932. Lawrenceville, New Jersey: The Red Sea Press. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/NRZVWSCD/collection |
||||||
|
People.
Milner estimates the American Bottom population ("population figures for Cahokia were doubled to approximate the inhabitants of all mound centers and added to valley-wide estimates for small settlements") in the Sand Prairie phase had fallen about 75% from the Stirling peak. [1] Which was: "It is likely that at least 50,000 people lived within the 2000 square kilometer “greater Cahokia” region at its height (ca. A.D. 1100)." [2] "George Milner estimates that there were roughly 8000 people in the Cahokia central administrative complex and up to 50,000 in the greater Cahokia region after AD 1050. Before that the neither had large populations—perhaps less than 1000 people in the entire greater Cahokia region." However: "With new excavations at East St. Louis the estimate for the central administrative complex needs to be increased to something like 15,000." [3] [1]: (Milner 2006, 124) [2]: (Pauketat 2014, 15) [3]: (Peregrine/Pauketat 2014, 15) |
||||||
|
Inhabitants. "Although there is an abundance of archaeological remains in the ground of the area where it once spread, there is no indication of agglomerations of people above village level, thus there is no evidence that would warrant the existence of communities of a size that would be necessary to develop social stratification, which is regarded as one of the attributes of social complexity. Numerous excavations and prospections have contributed to the notion that no towns or any kind of urban environments existed. The rather small size of almost all recorded sites and the comparatively small quantities of excavated cultural remains even rule out village communities. Apparently the typical settlement of the Nok Culture which occupied the prehistoric landscape during all phases was either a hamlet or a single compound. What can be concluded from this is that there was no high population density and that Nok communities were small-scaled and organised in locally autonomous groups. Probably these groups consisted of only one or a few extended families or a comparable number of people living together at one site."
[1]
[1]: (Breunig and Ruppe 2016: 252) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/ES4TRU7R. |
||||||
|
Inhabitants. "Although there is an abundance of archaeological remains in the ground of the area where it once spread, there is no indication of agglomerations of people above village level, thus there is no evidence that would warrant the existence of communities of a size that would be necessary to develop social stratification, which is regarded as one of the attributes of social complexity. Numerous excavations and prospections have contributed to the notion that no towns or any kind of urban environments existed. The rather small size of almost all recorded sites and the comparatively small quantities of excavated cultural remains even rule out village communities. Apparently the typical settlement of the Nok Culture which occupied the prehistoric landscape during all phases was either a hamlet or a single compound. What can be concluded from this is that there was no high population density and that Nok communities were small-scaled and organised in locally autonomous groups. Probably these groups consisted of only one or a few extended families or a comparable number of people living together at one site."
[1]
[1]: (Breunig and Ruppe 2016: 252) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/ES4TRU7R. |
||||||
|
People. "It is very difficult to estimate the populations of the three kingdoms in the nineteenth century, although it is certain that Ouagadougou contained the largest, and Fadan’Gourma the smallest."
[1]
If it is difficult to estimate the population of this quasipolity in the 19th century, it seems reasonable to infer that this is also true for preceding centuries.
[1]: (Zahan 1960: 154) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/TVIRPGXD/collection. |
||||||
|
People. These figures are entirely estimates of the RA’s creation. No population estimates specifically for Toutswe settlements or territory have been discovered at this time, and the above figure is based on the following general estimates of population trends within the region. Population estimates discussed by Pikirayi give a general estimated range of between 1,000 – 2,000 per ‘centre’ in this region and period, though not referring to Toutswe settlements specifically. Huffman describes a general trend in Southern African history of polities being built upon “a base of small settlements near agricultural lands that typically accommodates more than half the population.” While intended as a survey of Bantu trends, if this trend proliferates in the region, and is true of the similarly cattle-wealth-predominant Bantu, it may be applicable to understanding the population demographics of other cattle-based societies within the region as well. If we assume that Pikirayi’s comments above hold true of the Toutswe settlements as well as others, and that Huffman’s comments are also valid for Toutswe society, then the above figures may be reasonable minimum-maximum estimates. Still, these should not be seen as definitive in any way. More detailed figures should be located, and if available, should replace this estimate. “From the 11th century onwards, population increased in the middle Limpopo valley and adjacent eastern Botswana, as is made evident by the growth of homesteads, villages and towns….settlement activity became concentrated at Taukome, Toutswemogala, Bosutswe, Mokgware and other places, where inhabitants kept large herds of cattle …. Population estimates in each of these centres range from 1,000 to 2,000….”
[1]
“As another consequence of the relationship between wealth and power, the absolute size of a capital and its relative difference from subordinate settlements varies with the degree of political stratification…. Apart from a few anomalies, clear trends emerge from this survey which are important for the investigation of political stratification in the past. First, every hierarchy has a base of small settlements near agricultural lands which typically accommodates more than half the population.”
[2]
[1]: (Pikirayi 2017; 886) Innocent Pikirayi, “Trade, Globalisation and the Archaic State in Southern Africa,” in Journal of Southern African Studies Vol. 43, No. 5 (2017): 879-893. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/FBAX3ZMJ/collection [2]: (Huffman 1986; 283) Thomas N. Huffman, “Archaeological Evidence and Conventional Explanations of Southern Bantu Settlement Patterns,” in Africa Vol. 56, No. 3 (1986): 280-298. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/WSH2S2SN/collection |
||||||
|
Seems likely that this mention of 30,000 people is referring to the city of Allada, rather than the entire polity, but it’s not clear: “By the mid-15th century, the population of Allada had reached approximately 30,000 people. It seems likely that the collection of small settlements up to this time organized themselves politically along decentralized lines, meaning that they ruled by consensus rather than granting sovereignty to a leader or king. Demographic growth, however, likely necessitated a transition to political centralization. Legends suggest that three brothers who had descended from people in what is now the city of Allada split the region into three parts and administered rule as kings. The first, Kokpon, remained in the capital city and became the ruler of the Allada kingdom. His brothers Do-Aklin and Te-Agdanlin allegedly left the city to establish their own kingdoms of Dahomey and Little Ardra, respectively, in what is now the city of Portno Novo.”
[1]
“By the mid-16th century, however, the Portuguese were actively trading at Allada’s capital, Grand Ardra. Grand Ardra was a city of considerable size, home to approximately 30,000 people; Allada as a whole had a population upwards of 200,000. Dutch physician Olfert Dapper wrote in his Description of Africa in 1668 of the presence of "towns and villages in great number" in Grand Ardra’s countryside. Over the course of the 17th century, Allada emerged as the paramount kingdom in the region, exacting regular tribute from its neighbors and legitimizing these tributary relationships through various ritual obligations.”
[2]
[1]: Aderinto, Saheed. African Kingdoms: An Encyclopedia of Empires and Civilizations. ABC-CLIO, 2017: 8. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/EB5TWDG7/collection [2]: Monroe, J. Cameron. “Urbanism on West Africa’s Slave Coast: Archaeology Sheds New Light on Cities in the Era of the Atlantic Slave Trade.” American Scientist, vol. 99, no. 5, 2011, pp. 400–09: 402. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/E5WA63Z2/collection |
||||||
|
“By 1837, the population of the Sokoto Caliphate had reached 10 million people, with an estimated 1.25 million of the total population enslaved.”
[1]
[1]: Falola, Toyin, and Ann Genova. Historical Dictionary of Nigeria. The Scarecrow Press, Inc., 2009: 331. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/SJAIVKDW/collection |
||||||
|
“Wukari’s political boundaries continued to contract up to the time of British pacification through Jukun failure to withstand Fulani and Chamba encroachment from the north, east, and west, and Tiv infiltration from the south. In the 1930’s Wukari Jukun numbered about 20,000; today there are even fewer. During the nineteenth century the Aku Uha-the king of Wukari-probably ruled a tribally heterogeneous population of at least four times this number.”
[1]
[1]: Young, M. W. (1966). The Divine Kingship of the Jukun: A Re-Evaluation of Some Theories. Africa: Journal of the International African Institute, 36(2), 135–153: 139–140. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/NTI9GQMF/collection |
||||||
|
People. "The data do not yet allow us to calculate population densities for the mseventeenth century or to establish a map of their distribution. [...] Actually, central Rwanda was a privileged habitat compared to other tropical habitats. Neither malaria nor trypanosomiasis was found here. The most frequent serious diseases were amebiases, helminthiases, lung diseases, a sort of diphtheria, yaws, a variant bubonic plague, and TB (tuberculosis). Yet infant mortality was probably quite high while the average life expectancy of the adult population can be estimated to have been around forty years or less, as was usual before the industrial revolution elsewhere. The demographic movement of the population alternated rapidly between high peaks and deep chasms. Normally, natality was higher than mortality and the population grew. But from time to time a great famine produced a hecatomb."
[1]
[1]: (Vansina 2004: 21-22) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/5J4MRHUB/collection. |
||||||
|
people. Firth estimated the Cretan population during Late Minoan IIIA and IIIB periods (1400-1300 BCE) at 110,000.
[1]
However, the area of east Crete may have been independent of Knossian control and was perhaps organized into a separate polity or group of polities.
[2]
Coded for roughly half to three-quarters of the island’s total population. It should be noted that this estimate is a working hypothesis open to objections and modifications.
[1]: Firth, R. 1995."Estimating the population of Crete during LM IIIA/B," Minos 29-30, 33-55. [2]: Bennet, J. 1987. "The wild country east of Dikte: the problem of east Crete in the LM III period," in Killen, J. T., Melena, J. L., and Olivier, J.-P. (eds), Studies in Mycenaean and Classical Greek presented to John Chadwick (Minos 20-22), Salamanga, 77-88. |
||||||
|
People.
500,000-1,000,000 at the political and cultural core, with 1,500,000-2,000,000 in the wider Erligang region which included non-Erligang ceramic traditions. The combination of the two figures might be called the total population of an "Erligang Empire". [1] If the city of Zhengzhou is considered to be the whole site, spread over 25km2 [2] or 2500 hectares, the estimated number of inhabitants is 500,000 at a (relatively low) density per hectare of 200 people or 1,000,000 at the higher estimate. Within the Erligang cultural sphere "each site and each region [had] its own local historical trajectory related to, but not necessarily determined by, the fate of the cultural and political core." [3] This can be visualised with a map of ceramic traditions. Including the Erligang variant, 9 ceramic traditions (Central Plains metropolitan traditions) have been identified within the Erligang cultural sphere. [4] These traditions may represent the quasi-polities that came under some form of influence from the Erligang core at Zhengzhou, or their provincial elites. For a hard upper limit to an estimate, McEvedy and Jones (1978) suggest no more than 5 million in the later Shang period. "By 3000 BC we can think in terms of a million peasants in the area either side of the lower Huang Ho". [5] They continue: "even in the full Bronze Age - the era known as the Shang period ... the agricultural zone did not exceed 1m km2, nor the population within it 5m, nor the population of China proper 6m." [5] Within the Erligang period we could infer the upper limit would be slightly less than the more developed later Shang, perhaps 3 million rather than 5 million. [1]: (Wang 2014, 179) Wang, Haicheng. 2014. Writing and the Ancient State: Early China in Comparative Perspective. Cambridge University Press. [2]: (Bagley 1999, 165) Bagley, R. in Loewe, Michael. Shaughnessy, Edward L.1999. The Cambridge History of Ancient China: From the Origins of Civilization to 221 BC. Cambridge University Press. [3]: (Campbell 2014, 100) Campbell, R. B. 2014. Archaeology of the Chinese Bronze Age from Erlitou to Anyang. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press. [4]: (Campbell 2014, 70) Campbell, R. B. 2014. Archaeology of the Chinese Bronze Age from Erlitou to Anyang. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press. [5]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 170-172) McEvedy, Colin. Jones, Richard. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books Ltd. London. |
||||||
|
People. “In the eighteenth century, as China’s population doubled to over 300 million, the Miao Frontier experienced corresponding demographic crisis, growing from a few tens of thousands to well over a hundred thousand residents.”
[1]
200,000 is a best guess of the population of the A-Hmao Big Flowery Hmong from extremely limited sources and will require further investigation. Modern populations estimates hover around 400,000. The quasi-polity’s population would have undoubtedly fluctuated greatly during the Hmong rebellions to the east and the subsequent mass dispersal from these regions to the south and west.
[1]: (88) McMahon, D. 2014. Rethinking the Decline of China’s Qing Dynasty: Imperial Activism and Borderland Management at the Turn of the Nineteenth Century. Routledge. |
||||||
|
People.
[1]
After an examination of population estimates for the 16th century: "In diachronic terms, the information is rather vague."
[2]
"Nevertheless, it seems clear that there is no evidence of high population density during the Neguanje occupation in the Sierra Nevada, making it likely that the absolute population in the Sierra Nevada and adjacent coastal plains was rather low. This is not to say that the Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta was not occupied during the Neguanje Period. For example, Castaño (1981: 178-9) reports Roja sobre superficie ceramics, from the Neguanje period, in Buritaca 200. This must mean that population density during Neguanje was very low in absolute terms, and much more so in relation to the Late Period. The same seems to be true for the Buritaca Period."
[3]
Study of the Santa Marta Bays, a survey area of 90.78 square km: "The population dynamics may be compared in absolute terms, although this is always a risky exercise. If a density of 5 to 10 persons per occupied hectare (Sanders, Parsons and Santley 1979:34-40) were assumed, then there would be between 90 and 179 persons for the Neguanje Period; between 95 and 190 for the Buritaca Period; between 1087 and 2174 for the Late Period; and only between 30 and 59 for the period after the Spanish invasion." [4] Ciudad Perdida had 4 ha in the 9th and 10th centuries: "Albeit the abrupt increase in construction, and the social and political transformations in Ciudad Perdida seemed to be even more profound than in Pueblito, since the small, 4 hectare Neguanje village of the 9th and 10th centuries had probably quadrupled in size by the end of the 12th century." [5] [1]: (Giraldo 2015, personal communication) [2]: (Langebaek 2005, 27) [3]: (Langebaek 2005, 95) [4]: (Langebaek 2005, 91) [5]: (Giraldo 2010, 252) |
||||||
|
People.
13,000: 3500-3400 BCE; 50,000: 3400-3200 BCE Naqada IIA-IIB: over 13,000; Naqada IIC-D: 50,000 [1] EWA: standard ref is Michael Dee. Dee, Michael, David Wengrow, Andrew Shortland, Alice Stevenson, Fiona Brock, Linus Girdland Flink, and Christopher Ramsey 2013. An absolute chronology for early Egypt using radiocarbon dating and Bayesian statistical modelling. Proceedings of the Royal Society A 469 (2159, November, article no. 2013.0395), 1-10. This data need to be incorporated. [2] -- this reference does contains date identification not population data. Naqadian Egypt is seen as a quasi-polity, or rather a collection of quasi polities. During Naqada II times there are a few chiefdoms with the town-centres, called nome pre-states or chiefdoms. And later, as the unification and polity development proceeds, proto-states (there is no agreement if the proto-states level appeared in the end of Naqada II or in the Naqada III period). The rapid changes in the polity population, which is seen above, is an effect of growing population but also or even first of all the result of development of the chiefdoms’ size. The exact time and the spread of unification is not known, so scholars can only show the level of changes at some distinguishing point. And this is exactly what G. P. Gilbert did (based on the three Upper Egyptian polities with centres in Naqada, Abydos/This and Hierakonpolis).The ref here should be David Wengrow’s book. [1]: These are calculations made by G. p. Gilbert: 2004. Weapons, Warriors and Warfare in Early Egypt. Oxford; BAR International Series 1208. pg: 108. [2]: http://rspa.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/469/2159/20130395 |
||||||
|
Province of Nubia, 100,000. Palestine: 250,000. Egypt: 3m. Total = 3.35 mln
[1]
However, McEvedy and Jones tend to underestimate.
A likely maximum population estimate is around 7 million. [2] Egypt: 4.5m by the end of the New Kingdom. [3] [1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 226) [2]: (Baines, John. Personal Communication to Jill Levine, Dan Hoyer, and Peter Turchin. April 2020. Email) [3]: (Stearns 2001, 30) |
||||||
|
for a fortified settlement.
around 100 inhabitants for isolated settlement "Settlement System. It seems that the population of the areas of influence of the Bell Beaker was mainly dispersed. The settlements are single or isolated, or, at most, there are concentrations of 10 to 20 domestic units. This type of settlement may allow its inhabitants to move with a certain frequency." [1] From that we can infer that polity population was probably around 100 inhabitants. "The Bell Beaker communities developed in a period of demographic growth, as we can deduce from the numerous sites of this period, the fact that the Bell Beaker communities moved to and exploited previously marginal lands, and the fact that in some areas there was a more permanent and nuclear type of settlement. But there are some differences depending on the different areas of study. fortified settlements. 1000-1500 In the areas where there was a dispersed type of settlement, the number of inhabitants per settlement was not very high (one or two families). On the other hand, in the areas where there are remains of fortified settlements, the number of inhabitants may be higher. For example, Los Millares (Spain) may have had between 1,000 and 1,500 inhabitants, considering the surface of the settlement and the minimum number of individuals necessary to benefit from the fortifications." [2] long village of 50 individuals "In this settlement, only the sandy ridge itself can be regarded as arable lend. This ridge 700-800 m long and between 70-100 m wide, would give roughly 5 to 8 ha of fertile land. This area could be expected to support a family of four to seven people (Harrison 1986). If all the eight sites along the ridge were occupied at the same time, the total number of people in this long "village" would number only up to 50 individuals (Harrison 1986)." [3] in Molenaarsgraaf (Netherlands) [1]: (Clop Garcia 2001, 25) [2]: (Clop Garcia 2001, 26) [3]: (Clop Garcia 2001, 30) |
||||||
|
[1,250,000-1,750,000]: 511 CE Merovingian kingdoms was a quasi-polity in terms of population that could be militarily controlled. This figure represents the average sized kingdom within the polity.
Total: [300,000-500,000]: 481 CE; [2,000,000-3,000,000]: 500 CE; [5,500,000-6,500,000]: 550 CE Estimated from below. Population of France [1] 400 CE = 5 500 CE = 4.75 600 CE = 4.5 700 CE = 4.75 800 CE = 5 Population of Belgium and Luxembourg [2] 400 CE = 0.3 500 CE = 0.3 600 CE = 0.3 700 CE = 0.3 800 CE = 0.3 Population of Netherlands [3] 400 CE = 0.2 500 CE = 0.2 600 CE = 0.2 700 CE = 0.2 800 CE = 0.2 Population of Germany [4] 400 CE = 3.5 500 CE = 3.25 600 CE = 3.0 700 CE = 3.0 800 CE = 3.25 Merovingian South West Germany. "activity radius of about 1km around early Neolithic settlements. This gives an area of slightly over 3 km2, of which 10 percent were fields and gardens. It was exploited by about 100 individuals (Kuster 1995:76-7). This implied a population density of about 30 inhabitants per km2. If we assume one settlement with about 200 inhabitants and some smaller settlements in one Gemarkung, we obtain a figure of 50-60 inhabitants per km2 for the Merovingian period." [5] [1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 57) McEvedy, C and Jones, R. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Allen Lane. London. [2]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 63) [3]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 65) [4]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 69) [5]: (Damminger in Wood ed. 1998, 69) |
||||||
|
people. Firth estimated the Cretan population during Late Minoan IIIA and IIIB periods (1400-1200 BCE) as 110,000.
[1]
However, during this period, after the collapse of the Knossian state, it was divided into many small, independent polities.
[2]
Crete, to quote Popham "was free, too, of centralized control and it may be assumed that the various geographical regions, or provinces, existed independently under their local rulers."
[3]
Expert input may be needed to suggest a code for the population of a typical Post-Palatial polity.
[1]: Firth, R. 1995."Estimating the population of Crete during LM IIIA/B," Minos 29-30, 33-55. [2]: Borgna, E. 2003. "Regional settlement patterns, exchange systems and sources of power in Crete at the ends of the Late Bronze Age: establishing a connection," SMEA 45, 158. [3]: Popham, M. R. 1994. "Late Minoan II to the end of the Bronze Age," in Evely, D., Hughes-Brock, H., and Momigliano, N. (eds), Knossos. A Labyrinth of History. Papers in Honour of Sinclair Hood, London, 90. |
||||||
|
Aperghis (2004)
[1]
[14,000,000-18,000,000]: 281 BCE. The estimated figure was calculated using information from the peak of the empire in 281 BCE. The population fluctuated as different kings won and lost territory. Ehrenberg (2013) [2] 30,000,000: ??? BCE Territory in 300 BCE Iran, Iraq, Transoxania, Syria and the Levant Territory in 200 BCE Iran, Iraq, Syria and the Levant, south eastern half of Anatolia (excluding patches of the coast). Territory in 100 BCE Northern Iraq, Syria and the Levant [1]: Aperghis, G. G. 2004. The Seleukid Royal Economy: The Finances and Financial Administration of the Seleucid Empire. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p58 [2]: (Ehrenberg 2013, 148) Ehrenberg, V. 2013. The Greek State (Routledge Library Editions: Political Science Volume 23). Routledge. |
||||||
|
Expert dispute. Order of magnitude difference between high and low estimates. The high figure is partly supported by ancient accounts of large army sizes. If the ancient accounts of army sizes are all wild exaggerations then the lower figure could be realistic.
"The population of India during this period was somewhere between 120,000,000 to 180,000,000 people." [1] - note this figure is for the whole of India. Ganges basin perhaps 60% of total. In Ganges basin 15 million in 500 BC, 20 million in 200 BCE. [2] [15.5-181] Million. [3] the vast difference in estimates is based on the lack of evidence outside of archaeological evidence in excavated urban territories. [1]: (Gabriel 2002, 218) Gabriel, Richard A. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Greenwood Publishing Group. [2]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 182) McEvedy, Colin. Jones, Richard. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books Ltd. London. [3]: Estimate for the whole period 342-187 BCE. Clark, Peter, ed. The Oxford Handbook of Cities in World History. Oxford University Press, 2013. p. 159 |
||||||
|
Aperghis (2004)
[1]
[14,000,000-18,000,000]: 281 BCE. The estimated figure was calculated using information from the peak of the empire in 281 BCE. The population fluctuated as different kings won and lost territory. Ehrenberg (2013) [2] 30,000,000: ??? BCE Territory in 300 BCE Iran, Iraq, Transoxania, Syria and the Levant Territory in 200 BCE Iran, Iraq, Syria and the Levant, south eastern half of Anatolia (excluding patches of the coast). Territory in 100 BCE Northern Iraq, Syria and the Levant [1]: Aperghis, G. G. 2004. The Seleukid Royal Economy: The Finances and Financial Administration of the Seleucid Empire. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p58 [2]: (Ehrenberg 2013, 148) Ehrenberg, V. 2013. The Greek State (Routledge Library Editions: Political Science Volume 23). Routledge. |
||||||
|
People. ‘The “Great Lake” supplied the water for irrigated rice cultivation and the fish protein to sustain the Khmer Empire’s population of more than 1 million.’
[1]
’Finally, during the late 1200s and 1300s Upper Burma, Angkor, and Dai Viet all suffered internal disorders and external attacks that eventually culminated in the sack of each capital and the collapse of central administration.40 These disorders derived from locally specific combinations of: a) eco- logical constraints, including shortages of quality land, which in turn reflected the combined effects of regional desiccation and a shift to more marginal lands after 200-300 years of sustained population growth; b) increased maritime trade that strengthened coastal principalities at the expense of the imperial heartlands in Upper Burma, Angkor, and Dong Kinh; c) Mongol incursions and more especially, large-scale Tai migrations; d) institutional features that conferred an excessive auton- omy on local power-holders. So severe was the ensuing fragmentation that by 1340, as noted, at least 23 mainland kingdoms were independent in the sense that they paid no regular tribute to other Southeast Asian rulers (see Figure 1.4).41 Most would survive into the 16th century.’
[2]
[3]
[1]: (Engelhardt 2005, p.20) [2]: (Lieberman 2003, p. 25) [3]: (Buckley, B., et al. 2010. Climate as a contributing factor in the demise of Angkor, Cambodia. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Vol. 107, No.15: 6748-652.) |
||||||
|
People.
Landlocked territory split between modern day Mali, Guinea and Senegal in that order only just reaching inland delta region. We can place an upper limit at 11.5 million which was the population of Mali, Guinea and Senegal in 1960 (no reference to a population crash between 1800 and 1960). However, Bamana kingdom covered less than 50% territory of these countries, so we can halve this to 5.5 million upper limit. It is likely the population of this region grew between 1800 and 1960 but at a much slower rate than that achieved in modern times. A reasonable estimate could be between 3-4 million for 1800 CE. Google data for population by country: Mali population in 1960: 5 million Senegal population in 1960: 3 million Guinea population in 1960: 3.5 million. |
||||||
|
People.
At this time 500,000-1,000,000 across the Sahel states (Mauritania, Mali, Niger, Chad) but at a very low level of organization with many pastoralists. If a Sahel population of 750,000 all lived in villages and there were 150 per village there would be 5000 villages. This seems too much. Urbanism at this time was unlikely the main form of living. If, say, 10% of the Sahel population lived in villages 75,000 population at 150 per village would give us 500 nascent settlements. This seems a more reasonable figure. However, the actual size of villages would have ranged. We could perhaps code [200-300] as an upper maximum for a quasi-polity that consisted of more than one village settlement. "Before the introduction of agriculture and animal husbandry the population of the area of the present-day Sahel states is unlikely to have exceeded 50,000: once pastoralism and agriculture had become well-established the population can hardly have been less than half a million. The chronology of the transition is as yet totally obscure, but there is no reason to postulate anything above the 50,000 line before 3000 BC or place the achievement of the half million later than 1000 BC. From this latter point a low rate of increase is all that is needed to bring the total to 1m by AD 1 and 2m by AD 1000." [1] [1]: (McEverdy and Jones 1978, 238) |
||||||
|
People. No evidence for hierarchical levels so the average quasi-polity unlikely to be more than one or two settlements. If largest settlement had a population about 1500 (150 per ha for 10 hectares) and we allow for some coordination with this settlement and some smaller outlying settlements then the largest quasi-polity may have been 2000-3000 people.
Sahel states = Mauritania, Mali, Niger, Chad. "Before the introduction of agriculture and animal husbandry the population of the area of the present-day Sahel states is unlikely to have exceeded 50,000: once pastoralism and agriculture had become well-established the population can hardly have been less than half a million. The chronology of the transition is as yet totally obscure, but there is no reason to postulate anything above the 50,000 line before 3000 BC or place the achievement of the half million later than 1000 BC. From this latter point a low rate of increase is all that is needed to bring the total to 1m by AD 1 and 2m by AD 1000." [1] [1]: (McEverdy and Jones 1978, 238) |
||||||
|
People. Songhai Empire covered a similar area to the Mali Empire apart from the West African coast (and inland).
Niane had 40-50 million for the Mali Empire. [1] -- check (is reference correct? was it 4-5 million?). Yes, reference accurately reported. However, it might be a typographical error. Population of Mali in 1960 was 5 million. No references in literature to massive population crash or genocide in the region between middle ages and 1960. McEvedy and Jones have the region of "The Sahel States" (Mauritania, Mali, Niger and Chad) at 2 million in 1000 CE, rising slowly to 3 million in 1500 CE. [2] [1]: (Niane 1984, 154) [2]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 239) McEvedy, Colin. Jones, Richard. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books Ltd. London. |
||||||
|
Typical number of inhabitants of a polity.
The overall population of Mongolia during this period was 600,000-1,000,000 (Kradin 2002). Chinggiz Khan had 8 (check) thousand warriors in the decisive battle against Jamucha, who had roughly the same size of his force. 16,000 x 5 (est. average Mongol ’tent’) = 80,000. Rounding this gives us an estimate of the population size of the larger polities in Mongolia (Rachewiltz 2004). Because this NGA during this period was a quasi-polity, the codes refer to a typical large polity, such as Naimans, Kereids, Tatars, Merkids, and Mongols. "Around 1260 the total nomadic population of Central and Inner Asia, all of which was included in the Mongol empire at that time, would have been about 4,250,000. Two fifths of this, or 1.7 million people, would have been found in Outer or Inner Mongolia; one fifth, or 850,000 people, in the Chaghatay realm of Transoxania, Semirechye and parts of Jungaria and the Tarim Basin; one-fifth in the Juchids’ domains in northern Central Asia and the North Caucasian and South Russian steppe; and the remaining fifth in the Middle East with Hulegu." [1] [1]: (Wink 2002, 168) Wink, Andre. 2002. Al-Hind: The Slavic Kings and the Islamic conquest, 11th-13th centuries. BRILL. |
||||||
|
People. A range reflecting a similar magnitude as the estimate for the Later Xiongnu and Imperial Xiongnu Confederation.
500,000 Xianbi. "The greater part of the ethnic Xianbei tribes was concentrated in the central and eastern areas of the steppe empire. This can be confirmed by the fact that the regions of eastern Mongolia and eastern Baikal (of the ‘left wing’) were areas of traditional residence of the Xianbei." [1] However, "the imperial confederation was multi-ethnic" [1] and by "the end of the 2nd century AD not less than 100 thousand tents of the Xiongnu took the political identity of Xianbei (HHS 90.9b)". [1] How many people to a tent? A family of 5 to a tent would add 500,000 to the total. There also were other ethnicities. [1] 500,000: 160 CE (Xianbi only?) "The demography of the tribes was unequal. Thus, we have mentions of bu with five thousand people, several dozens thousand people, five thousand ‘households’ (about 25 thousand people), ten thousand soldiers and ten thousand tents (up to fifty thousand people); the largest had about twenty thousand ‘households’ - some one hundred thousand people (Kradin 1994; many comparative dates see in Cribb 1991)." [2] "Second, at the time of Tanshihuai, the strength of the Xianbei army reached one hundred thousand horsemen (Taskin 1984: 78). If one considers that all men were potentially warriors, and that the adult male population should amount to about 1/5 of the total population, one can assume that the total population was about half a million." [3] [1]: (Kradin 2011, 200-201) [2]: (Kradin 2011, 199) [3]: (Kradin 2011, 201) |
||||||
|
People.
Territory of "Gana" in 1000 CE included the Inland Delta region of Mali from Timbuktu to the tributaries/uplands, the eastern half of Mauritania and part of eastern Senegal. [1] We need an estimate of the population within this region. Using the McEvedy and Jones figure of 2 million by 1000 CE for the "Sahel States" (Mauritania, Mali, Niger, Chad) I will estimate about 1 million. "Before the introduction of agriculture and animal husbandry the population of the area of the present-day Sahel states is unlikely to have exceeded 50,000: once pastoralism and agriculture had become well-established the population can hardly have been less than half a million. The chronology of the transition is as yet totally obscure, but there is no reason to postulate anything above the 50,000 line before 3000 BC or place the achievement of the half million later than 1000 BC. From this latter point a low rate of increase is all that is needed to bring the total to 1m by AD 1 and 2m by AD 1000." [2] [1]: (Konemann et al 2010, 302 Atlas Historica, Editions Place des Victories. Paris.) [2]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 238) |
||||||
|
People.
"Table 3.10. Monte Alban Late I sites in Valley of Oaxaca subareas." [1] Etla: 10618; Central (contains Monte Alban): 22844; N Valle Grande: 8581; S Valle Grande: 2633; W Tlacolula: 4344; E Tlacolula: 2317; Ejutla: 3455; Albarradas: 1740; Sola: 1539. [1] Total = 58,071 Late I early population tripled to 55,000. About 75% of increase within 20 km of Monte Alban. [2] The approximate figure 50,000 corresponds to the estimated population of the Valley of Oaxaca during the Monte Albán Ic phase by the Settlement Pattern Project [3] , although it is not clear whether the entire valley was under Zapotec control at this time. [4] The population estimate does not include the population of the conquered area Canada Cuicatlan. "Table 11.3. Population in the largest centers, by phase, in Oaxaca and Ejutla." [5] Valley of Oaxaca population (Largest center in Oaxaca): Tierras Largas: 327 (128); San Jose: 1942 (1384); Guadalupe: 1788 (774); Rosario: 1835 (564); Early I: 14652 (5250); Late I: 51339 (17242); Monte Alban II: 41927 (14492); Monte Alban IIIA: 120121 (16507); Monte Alban IIIB: 78930 (24189); Monte Alban IV: 77612 (16117); Monte Alban V: 166467 (13831). [5] [1]: (Feinman and Nicholas 2017, 40) Gary M Feinman. Linda M Nicholas. 2017. Settlement Patterns in the Albarradas Area of Highland Oaxaca, Mexico: Frontiers, Boundaries, and Interaction. Fieldiana Anthropology, 46(1):1-162. Publication 1572. Field Museum of Natural History. URL: http://www.bioone.org/doi/full/10.3158/0071-4739-46.1.1 [2]: (Blanton, Feinman, Kowalewski, Nicholas 1999, 92) Blanton, Richard E. Feinman, Gary M. Kowalewski, Stephen A. Nicholas, Linda M. 1999. Ancient Oaxaca. The Monte Alban State. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. [3]: Marcus, J. and K. V. Flannery (1996). Zapotec civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley, Thames and Hudson London, p144-5 [4]: Marcus, J. and K. V. Flannery (1996). Zapotec civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley, Thames and Hudson London, p162 [5]: (Feinman and Nicholas 2013, 183) Gary M Feinman. Linda M Nicholas. 2013. Settlement Patterns of the Ejutla Valley, Oaxaca, Mexico: A Diachronic Macroscale Perspective. Fieldiana Anthropology, 43(1):1-330. 2013. Field Museum of Natural History. URL: http://www.bioone.org/doi/full/10.3158/0071-4739-43.00.1 |
||||||
|
Population of Italy between the 5th and 6th centuries CE according to McEvedy and Jones.
[1]
[1]: (McEvedy and Jones: 106-107) McEvedy and Jones. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/search/mcevedy/titleCreatorYear/items/6U4QZXCG/item-list |
||||||