List of countries by population throughout history?

[xfactor99]

I'm looking for a web site/resource that lists the countries by population throughout history. More specifically, during the two World Wars, although other points in history would be nice as well.

If anyone knows where I could find this it would be much appreciated

 

[aronnax]

I can tell you that China has been the largest population for the past 1000 years at least

 

[Mirc]

Not true. It didn't have more than the British Empire.

 

[aronnax]

Not true. It didn't have more than the British Empire.

Okay fine, its only 58 million more for 40 something years

 

[ArmorPierce]

Not true. It didn't have more than the British Empire.

From the looks of a graph, it looks like the Chinese may have been. http://www.iiasa.ac.at/Research/LUC/ChinaFood/data/pop/pop_6.htm

 

[alex994]

From the looks of a graph, it looks like the Chinese may have been. http://www.iiasa.ac.at/Research/LUC/ChinaFood/data/pop/pop_6.htm

Well, the British Empire wasn't just in Europe; it had India, especially India too.

For most of the past millenium and a good chunk of the one before that, China had the largest population in the world.

 

[Ofuh]

Why have China and many other east asian countries always had such a high population?

 

[Lockesdonkey]

It's just China that had the large population (India is not in East Asia); that's largely a function of Chinese political stability. It's true that Korea and Japan have high population densities, however. I suspect that Japan's high densities might have to do with its rapid industrialization in the 19th century, such that Japan could support more people (via industrial farming techniques) before the Japanese had the low-birthrate mindset of an industrialized people, but I actually know nothing about the subject and could be totally wrong.

 

[Disenfrancised]

It's just China that had the large population (India is not in East Asia); that's largely a function of Chinese political stability. It's true that Korea and Japan have high population densities, however. I suspect that Japan's high densities might have to do with its rapid industrialization in the 19th century, such that Japan could support more people (via industrial farming techniques) before the Japanese had the low-birthrate mindset of an industrialized people, but I actually know nothing about the subject and could be totally wrong.

on China IMHO its more that
-the great river systems are incredably fertile
-they had that labour intensive super crop rice that leads towards both hihg population and high population density to increase production
-the consistent and early belief of Han rulers that population was power, as whenever they conquered south they would forcibly move their peasents and 'plant' in the new lands.

As to japan, its known that the archipelago had a population of 20 million plus at 1700, making more populated than any european country except france at the time. So its not a recent occurence, and the answer once again is probably 'rice'.

 

[aronnax]

It's just China that had the large population (India is not in East Asia); that's largely a function of Chinese political stability. It's true that Korea and Japan have high population densities, however. I suspect that Japan's high densities might have to do with its rapid industrialization in the 19th century, such that Japan could support more people (via industrial farming techniques) before the Japanese had the low-birthrate mindset of an industrialized people, but I actually know nothing about the subject and could be totally wrong.

Actually, Edo (Tokyo) was one of the largest cities in the world. It had about 1 million people at around Commodore Perrydew arrive.

Strangely, the city was clean, the roads swept regulary and all that pollution nonsens never existed

 

[challenger]

According to an atlas from 1933, the cities with a population of over 1 Million at that time were (the second number indicates the agglomeration):

New York (6,930,000/8,431,000)
London (4,397,000/8,203,000)
Berlin (4,333,000)
Chicago (3,376,000/3,962,000)
Paris (2,891,000)
Moscow (2,781,000)
Shanghai (2,674,000)
Osaka (2,454,000)
Leningrad (2,237,000)
Buenos Aires (2,195,000)
Tokyo (2,071,000)
Philadelphia (1,951,000)
Vienna (1,866,000)
Hamburg (1,147,000)
Detroit (1,569,000)
Rio de Janeiro (1,545,000)
Tientsin (1,389,000)
Sydney (1,256,000)
Los Angeles (1,238,000)
Calcutta (1,197,000)
Warsaw (1,179,000)
Bombay (1,158,000)
Glasgow (1,088,000/1,190,000)
Cairo (1,065,000)
Melbourne (1,033,000)
Rome (1,008,000)
Mexico City (1,007,000)
Budapest (1,006,000)
Birmingham (1,002,000/1,151,000)
Sao Paulo (1,000,000)
Greater Liverpool (1,162,000)
Greater Boston (1,072,000)
Greater Manchester (1,025,000)
Greater Constantinople (1,203,000)

Of course, the numbers should be taken with a pinch of salt, but they serve to give an impression.

 

[Ofuh]

Actually, Edo (Tokyo) was one of the largest cities in the world. It had about 1 million people at around Commodore Perrydew arrive.

Strangely, the city was clean, the roads swept regulary and all that pollution nonsens never existed

Didn't Rome used to have 1 million people at its height? I could be wrong, I just heard it here and there but never actually looked into it.

 

[aronnax]

Didn't Rome used to have 1 million people at its height? I could be wrong, I just heard it here and there but never actually looked into it.

Thats true too. Tokyo is just one of the other few cities to have over a million before the industrial era

 

[Mirc]

Didn't Rome used to have 1 million people at its height? I could be wrong, I just heard it here and there but never actually looked into it.

Actually, I heard it had around 2 million, and decreased to almost 200,000 in the middle ages.

 

[Lockesdonkey]

That's correct. Rome got really hammered by the Germanic tribes, and then there was disease...many if not most historians estimate that the people of Rome were only restored to the standard of living that they had in the first and second centuries AD in the nineteenth...

 

[Ofuh]

It is so hard for us to imagine what life must of been like back then in the city of Rome. I can't picture a huge city of 1+ million(which is still big by today's standards in western culture) living without electricity etc.. I wonder what the area of the city was. You'd figure there would be a LOT more ruins found than the ones that are known. Or probably people up until recently did it like they do everywhere else and tear down the buildings to use the materials for construction.

 

[challenger]

Or probably people up until recently did it like they do everywhere else and tear down the buildings to use the materials for construction.

That's exactly what happened.

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

Actually, Edo (Tokyo) was one of the largest cities in the world. It had about 1 million people at around Commodore Perrydew arrive.

Strangely, the city was clean, the roads swept regulary and all that pollution nonsens never existed

You mean Commodore Matthew Perry? There's no Commodore Perrydew. And it had more than one million people at that time.

Actually, I heard it had around 2 million, and decreased to almost 200,000 in the middle ages.

Oh, it fell far below 200,000. Most estimates put the population of Rome at around 10,000 in the second half of the first millenium.

 

[sydhe]

I'd think the only substantial cities in Europe in the late first millennium would be Constantinople and some cities in Muslim Spain. Possibly Venice, Adrianople and Salonica in the next rank. Rome fell hard when it lost its food supply.

 

[challenger]

In ~1300, the only European cities with a population of over 100,000 were London, Genova, Venice, Milan, Florence and Paris.