Population

[unmerged(29041)]

So if I'm understanding your point 3 above I'd take the 1.5 million population for Portugal in that same 1591 census, divide it by 10, and then compare it to whatever the number would be in a hands-off EU game and then apply one of the three divisors to get the 1419 starting population?

Yes, except that it does not need to be hands-off, as the player has no impact on population, and that at least three games should be checked because deviations of about 20% are found.
For Portugal I have the following data for 1600 from four games:

   Lisboa       Porto      Faro
114641.711   43647.082   23515.406
 97967.453   33942.867   30307.252
 75540.508   36116.055   27214.686
 96895.844   40836.594   34229.801
-------------------------------------
 96,260       38,635      28,816

Rounding the numbers, the pop for Portugal in EU2 in 1600 is:
Tago: 95,000
Porto: 40,000
Algarve: 30,000

Total: 165,000

This also fits well with your data of 1,500,000

Now you have to decide how to distribute those 150,000 (time to introduce the real data). For example:
Tago: 95,000
Porto: 35,000
Algarve: 20,000

And now you check the initial values in 1419:
Tago: 13,000
Porto: 10,000
Algarve: 5,000

They only need to be slightly modified. Remember that low values take a lot longer to grow. Final solution would be:
Tago: 13,000
Porto: 9,000
Algarve: 4,500

This data will probably give you good population values for 1550-1750, but probably are ridiculously low for 1419-1550

 

[unmerged(29041)]

So how would this affect the various population events in the game? As you know I'm particularly concerned about the large explusions of the Jews and Moriscos from Spain and also the various plagues. If we have a solid number like the 275-300,000 Moriscos expelled from Spain, do we just divide that by 10? And the 1596-1602 series of plagues in Iberia is credited with killing about 10% of the population in the provinces that it hit. So should we run a test up to that period and then subtract 10% from the EU population at that time?

In the greater scheme of things how do you think we should recreate the stagnation/depopulation of Iberia during the 1600s? Some events to replicate the Castilian plagues of 1629-31, 1650-4, and 1694, just to name a few?

It is simply impossible to replicate. Human populations respond to excess resources rather quickly. At almost all times, Europe was holding as much population as agriculture allowed. Stagnation was due to beeing at max sustainability or abandoning of lands. The great jumps in population occurred because of the introduction of new agricultural techniques (fertilizers, alternating compatible crops, etc) or new crops (maize, potato). From time to time plagues, wars, migratory movements wether forced (moriscos) or voluntary (well over half a million Spaniards went to the New World between 1560 and 1800, a lot more than the moriscos), will reduce the numbers quite significantly, but the population always responds to that if resources are available by growing back.

With the simplistic model in EU2, if you take 10% off the population of a province for a plague, you simple have to put it back later (corrected for inflation), or that province will always lag with repect to others forever, which is a false premise.

The task would be unsurmountable (think about HYW, TYW, etc depopulations, and the many plagues). It is better to leave it as it is. Also for most of the world we have no data, so esentially you would be penalizing those countries were data is available. We already have quite mild random plague events. Historic plagues should be of the same calibre, except that localized in time and space. Essentially they are correct, because even if 5% of the population died, the growth rate increased above average afterwards to compensate, and you cannot imitate that in EU2.

Some outstanding events, like the expulsion of the moriscos can be represented with data, but the expusion will have to be followed by the repopulation event, that did take place.

 

[sturmvogel]

For Portugal I have the following data for 1600 from four games:

   Lisboa       Porto      Faro
114641.711   43647.082   23515.406
 97967.453   33942.867   30307.252
 75540.508   36116.055   27214.686
 96895.844   40836.594   34229.801
-------------------------------------
 96,260       38,635      28,816

Rounding the numbers, the pop for Portugal in EU2 in 1600 is:
Tago: 95,000
Porto: 40,000
Algarve: 30,000

Total: 165,000

This also fits well with your data of 1,500,000

Now you have to decide how to distribute those 150,000 (time to introduce the real data). For example:
Tago: 95,000
Porto: 35,000
Algarve: 20,000

And now you check the initial values in 1419:
Tago: 13,000
Porto: 10,000
Algarve: 5,000

They only need to be slightly modified. Remember that low values take a lot longer to grow. Final solution would be:
Tago: 13,000
Porto: 9,000
Algarve: 4,500

I expected Portugal's population to increase, not decrease, using your system. I think you incorrectly used the most adverse divisor because Portugal's population was about 20% of Spain's in 1600 in reality and it keeps that ratio in the 1600 game data you've provided. 790,000 for Spain in game terms and 165,000 for Portugal. But you've given Portugal 26,500 population in 1419, which is just a hair short of one tenth the size of the 256,000 for the provinces that would form Spain. Since both nations would grow at the same rates, barring events like the various expulsions, that would mean that Portugal would still be a bit short of one tenth the size of Spain in 1600.
To restate the issue you've divided the Spanish 1600 EU population by roughly one third to get the 1419 data, but you've divided the Portugese data by one sixth to derive their starting population. So I think that their population total in 1419 should almost double to 52,000 or so. Perhaps 27,000 in Tago, 17,000 in Porto and 9000 in Algarve.

Now we haven't fine tuned the expulsion events, but they're going to greatly complicate our efforts to get the populations of these two countries to remain in balance since anywhere between 60,000 and 100,000 Jews fled Spain to Portugal in 1492 and some 275,000 - 300,000 Moriscos left Spain for North Africa in 1571.
Another issue is that I'm not sure exactly what territories were included in the Portugese data. It could well include Madeira, the Azores, the Cape Verde Islands and Tangiers/Ceuta, which would again greatly complicate things, or maybe not since the census was conducted by the Spanish Crown.

At any result I think we'll have to run 3 or 4 test games once we finalize the population events to ensure that we have the right figures in the proper relationship to each other.

 

[sturmvogel]

It is simply impossible to replicate. Human populations respond to excess resources rather quickly. At almost all times, Europe was holding as much population as agriculture allowed. Stagnation was due to beeing at max sustainability or abandoning of lands. The great jumps in population occurred because of the introduction of new agricultural techniques (fertilizers, alternating compatible crops, etc) or new crops (maize, potato). From time to time plagues, wars, migratory movements wether forced (moriscos) or voluntary (well over half a million Spaniards went to the New World between 1560 and 1800, a lot more than the moriscos), will reduce the numbers quite significantly, but the population always responds to that if resources are available by growing back.

With the simplistic model in EU2, if you take 10% off the population of a province for a plague, you simple have to put it back later (corrected for inflation), or that province will always lag with repect to others forever, which is a false premise.

The task would be unsurmountable (think about HYW, TYW, etc depopulations, and the many plagues). It is better to leave it as it is. Also for most of the world we have no data, so esentially you would be penalizing those countries were data is available. We already have quite mild random plague events. Historic plagues should be of the same calibre, except that localized in time and space. Essentially they are correct, because even if 5% of the population died, the growth rate increased above average afterwards to compensate, and you cannot imitate that in EU2.

Some outstanding events, like the expulsion of the moriscos can be represented with data, but the expusion will have to be followed by the repopulation event, that did take place.

I'm perfectly willing to discard my plague event as I think you have a very good point. Why should we penalize one country for something because we have data for it, but not another for because we have no data.

However, while I generally agree with you about repopulation, that was definitely not the case in Spain, and to a lesser extent, Portugal, after the plagues and whatnot in the era between 1600 and 1700. The population as a whole didn't expand at all during that period according to my sources so I'm not at all inclined to actually replace the expelled Moriscos until after the Bourbons take the throne and Spain begins to treat agriculture and farmers with a little respect. The Iberian attitude towards manual labor and "trade" as beneath contempt really, really screwed them over in the long run and we need to reflect that as much as possible, IMO. That's difficult to do since a peaceful Spain can pump all that gold into research and damn near hypertech.

Can you tell that I've been reading An Economic History of Spain by Jaime Vicens Vives? It's a bit older than I'd prefer, but since it's in English I'll go with it. It's given me a lot of ideas for events to hamper trade and infrastructure development during the Hapsburg era and to increase them under the Bourbons. Even so there was a real reason why Iberia was regarded as one of the more primitive corners of Europe during the Enlightenment.

 

[unmerged(29041)]

I expected Portugal's population to increase, not decrease, using your system. I think you incorrectly used the most adverse divisor because Portugal's population was about 20% of Spain's in 1600 in reality and it keeps that ratio in the 1600 game data you've provided. 790,000 for Spain in game terms and 165,000 for Portugal. But you've given Portugal 26,500 population in 1419, which is just a hair short of one tenth the size of the 256,000 for the provinces that would form Spain. Since both nations would grow at the same rates, barring events like the various expulsions, that would mean that Portugal would still be a bit short of one tenth the size of Spain in 1600.
To restate the issue you've divided the Spanish 1600 EU population by roughly one third to get the 1419 data, but you've divided the Portugese data by one sixth to derive their starting population. So I think that their population total in 1419 should almost double to 52,000 or so. Perhaps 27,000 in Tago, 17,000 in Porto and 9000 in Algarve.

Now we haven't fine tuned the expulsion events, but they're going to greatly complicate our efforts to get the populations of these two countries to remain in balance since anywhere between 60,000 and 100,000 Jews fled Spain to Portugal in 1492 and some 275,000 - 300,000 Moriscos left Spain for North Africa in 1571.
Another issue is that I'm not sure exactly what territories were included in the Portugese data. It could well include Madeira, the Azores, the Cape Verde Islands and Tangiers/Ceuta, which would again greatly complicate things, or maybe not since the census was conducted by the Spanish Crown.

At any result I think we'll have to run 3 or 4 test games once we finalize the population events to ensure that we have the right figures in the proper relationship to each other.

My calculations could be a bit off, and as you say, tests should demonstrate that by 1600 mean population should have grown within (+-)5% of target, with deviations up to 20%. Portugal should have roughly 1/5 of the population in 1419 as expected in 1600. I used the value of 150,000 that you provided, not the 165,000 from the game, because that is the one you said it was correct.

But there is an aspect that is hard to put in calculations, but is both real and has a very important effect. The population of a country of 50,000 habitants, all in one province, grows much faster than the population of a country of 50,000 habitants distributed in ten provinces. Why? I don't know. The simplest explanation is that the number of fractionals kept in the calculations is limited (it appears to be 3 digits in EU2, according to save-files), and the fractions discarded quickly add up.
For example the province of 50,000 at a 5% 10-yearly growth rate, should grow by 20.85 habitants the first month. You will see a 20 increment, but part of the fraction is past over for calculation. Let's say 0.8 in our example for the sake of simplification. In the province of 5,000, the growth should be 2.085. You will lose a higher percentage of the growth when you cut the fractionals. In our example the growth would be 2, and 0.0 would pass to the population base for next month. This difference quickly adds up. If you take the population of a large province (150,000 habitants) in 1600 from a game, and the initial population, you will see that you will have to multiply the first by a factor of around 0.2, meaning that it has growth by 500%. A small province (25,000) in 1600, will show that its population has grown by only 250%.
In practical terms, this means that the population of Portugal, with 3 large provinces, grows much faster than the population of Spain, with many small provinces, and therefore the correct data for 1419 will require less population for Portugal to achieve a correct value and ratio in 1600. Tests will show it, and you can check it easily from a single savefile in 1600. Add up the populations for Spain and Portugal in that game and compare them with the respective values in 1419, and you will see that Portugal grows faster.

The islands can be kept out of the calculations, as their contribution is small. I saw that the data for Baleares was within ball park values, and that is enough for me.

 

[Bordic]

If of any use...

I post here some datas about the population of European countries and cities from the book "Storia economica dell'Europa Pre-industriale" (English translation: Before the Industrial Revolution: European Society and Economy, 1000-1700) wrote by Carlo M. Cipolla, an Italian historian.

The author says the figures are to be taken with an approxiamtion of 20 % or more, expecially for the data before 1650.

[B]European countries	1000	1300	1500	1600	1700[/B]	(figures are in millions)

France			5	15	16	18	19
Germany			3	12	13	16	15
British isles		2	5	5	7	9	
Italy			5	10	11	13	13
Balkan states		_	_	7	8	8
Low Countries		_	_	2	3	3
Danubian countries 	_	_	6	7	9
Poland			_	_	4	5	6
Russia			_	_	10	15	18
Scandinavia		_	_	_	2	3
Spain and Portugal	_	_	9	11	10
Switzerland		_	0,8	0,8	1,1	1,2

[B]European cities				1300	1400	1500	1550	1600	1650	1700[/B]  (figures are in thousands)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Italian provinces		
(Piedmont)		Asti						9		10
			Bergamo					18	24		25
			Bologna				55	55	63	58	63
			Brescia				50	40	50	40	35
(Lombardy)		Como			10			11	9
(Lombardy)		Cremona					37	40	17
			Ferrara						33	25	27
			Florence	95	55	70	60	80	70	80
			Genoa						63	70
(Tuscany)		Lucca						25	25
			Mantua				27	35	31	15	20
			Milan				100	50	110	95	100
			Modena				18	20	18		18
			Naples					210	250	300	210
(Veneto)		Padua		30		27	32	35	35
			Palermo				50	80	100		100
			Parma				16	20	25	20	30
(Lombardy)		Pavia				18	13	18	19	20
(Umbria-Papal states)	Perugia						20	16	16
(Emilia)		Piacenza				27	30
(Tuscany)		Pistoia		11	4		8	8		8
(Tuscany)		Pisa							15
			Roma				50	45	110	126	135
(Tuscany)		San Gimignano		3		5			3
			Siena				15	10	19	16	16
			Turin			4		14	20		42
			Venice				115	160	150	120	140
(Veneto)		Verona			20	40	46	55	25
(Veneto)		Vicenza						35	25	26


Germany HRE		Hamburg		7	20	20		19
			Augsburg			18			20
			Koeln			30		35	
			Frankfurt		10			25	15	25
			Leipzig					7	15	15	22
			Nuernberg		20	50	
			Wien			20			60

France
			Besançon			8		11		17
			Lion					70			90
			Paris		100				300		500
			Rouen			40			80		65
			Strasbourg					25		27
			Toulouse		23	35			42	43

Low Countries
			Amsterdam			15	35	100	135	180
			Antwerp							57
			Bruges		35					34
			Leida							66
			Liege							50	55
			Ypres			11	8				12

England
			London			35	70	80	250	450	600

Switzerland
			Geneva			5	13				17
			Zurich				5		7

Sweden
			Stockholm							50

Spain		
			Barcelona					64
			Madrid						75
			Sevilla					100	150	125
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[B]European cities				1300	1400	1500	1550	1600	1650	1700[/B]

 

[RossN]

I've always found the population for Dublin (ie. the province of Meath) amazingly low, especially given the size of the other Irish provinces and this is noticable in all eras.

For instance Dublin had a population of 182,370 in 1798 (source) - 10 times the size it is given in EU2 (for the Age of Revoloutions period).

 

[Toio]

It is simply impossible to replicate. Human populations respond to excess resources rather quickly. At almost all times, Europe was holding as much population as agriculture allowed. Stagnation was due to beeing at max sustainability or abandoning of lands. The great jumps in population occurred because of the introduction of new agricultural techniques (fertilizers, alternating compatible crops, etc) or new crops (maize, potato). From time to time plagues, wars, migratory movements wether forced (moriscos) or voluntary (well over half a million Spaniards went to the New World between 1560 and 1800, a lot more than the moriscos), will reduce the numbers quite significantly, but the population always responds to that if resources are available by growing back.

With the simplistic model in EU2, if you take 10% off the population of a province for a plague, you simple have to put it back later (corrected for inflation), or that province will always lag with repect to others forever, which is a false premise.

The task would be unsurmountable (think about HYW, TYW, etc depopulations, and the many plagues). It is better to leave it as it is. Also for most of the world we have no data, so esentially you would be penalizing those countries were data is available. We already have quite mild random plague events. Historic plagues should be of the same calibre, except that localized in time and space. Essentially they are correct, because even if 5% of the population died, the growth rate increased above average afterwards to compensate, and you cannot imitate that in EU2.

Some outstanding events, like the expulsion of the moriscos can be represented with data, but the expusion will have to be followed by the repopulation event, that did take place.

I agree here with your assumptions , but I fail to see why we (agceep) keep trying to gather information from other later scenarios and work backwards with some form of calculation to gather population numbers for the 1419 scenario.

I prefer to firstly:
- assume that the programmers have had a formula for the population numbers and that number as per my opinion and tests is based on 3% of RL populaion as per my post on 88.

- we have true national population numbers from different sources , that is, Bordic, myself, yourself and any other modder that I cannot recall at present. Then base these true national population numbers and find out what figures we arrive at based on the 3% "system". an example would be that portugal had 950000 RL of population in and around 1419.
3% of 950000 is 28500, then check what figures we have at present for the 1419 scenario and amend the provinces accordingly.

this is by far the simplest and fastest way of making these changes.

 

[Bordic]

- we have true national population numbers from different sources , that is, Bordic, myself, yourself and any other modder that I cannot recall at present. Then base these true national population numbers and find out what figures we arrive at based on the 3% "system". an example would be that portugal had 950000 RL of population in and around 1419.
3% of 950000 is 28500, then check what figures we have at present for the 1419 scenario and amend the provinces accordingly.

this is by far the simplest and fastest way of making these changes.

I think the problem here is that we have no good data about population before 1600 as they are based on assumptions and as Fodoron said based on fireplaces ("focolar-e,i" in italian) with 20% approximation. That is reported from Cipolla's research too.

We have also to considerthe great plagues and war famine of 1630-1650 in which most of all German and Italian populations were halvened.

Reading through Henry Kamen's book "The Iron Century. Social Change in Counter-Reformation Europe 1550-1660" (1971) I have found more data about population in Europe in 1600:

Russia,Ukraine 		5 inhabitants per km²
Northern Italy 		44 inhabitants per km²
Low Countries 		50 inhabitants per km²
France 			34 inhabitants per km²
Central Germany 	18-23 inhabitants per km²
Castile 		18,2 inhabitants per km²

Population in Italy 	1550	1600	1650 in thousands

Northern Italy		4,700	5,400	4,200
Central Italy		2,500	2,900	2,700
Kingdom of Naples
(Southern Italy)	3,000	3,300	2,800
Islands (Sicily,...)	1,200	1,600	1,700

Islands should mean Sardinia and Corsica too, but no clear hint is given...

 

[Herr Doctor]

“The population of the main regions of Europe and the population of China and America in millions inhabitants” from famous Pierre Chaunu’s “La civilisation de l’Europe classique”. Unfortunately, I have a Russian edition, so I translated names (in red).

 

[Bordic]

And more, there is a nice picture representing the population density in Europe in 1600s from Kamen's book "The Iron Century" I have reported in my post above:

Some translations:

40 abitanti e oltre per km² : 40 inhabitants and beyond each km²
Tra 20 e 40 abitanti per km² : between 20 and 40 each km²
Tra 5 e 20 abitanti per km² : between 5 and 20 each km²
Meno di 5 abitanti per km² : less than 5 inhabitants each km²


and another from the book "Europe in the Sixteenth Century" by Koenigsberger, Mosse and Bowler (1968):

Some translations:

da 200.000 a 400.000 abitanti means: from 200,000 to 400,000 inhabitants
and so on...

 

[Toio]

The only way I can see that inhabitants per square kilometre can work to gather population level per nations is if you know the land size of each nation.

an example.
10 million people in holland would have more people per sq km than 10 million people in france.

 

[Toio]

Based on some sources from the net, and books. I have found the following population stats ( all from 1490 to 1510).

I will use these facts to represent a scaling pattern from what was fact to what we have in 1419 gc

nation - historic "true" populations - 1419 GC pops using 3% formula
Austria - 2.0 M - 1.4 M # the 6 provs need increase
*Holland - 2.35 M - 1.7 M # the 5 provs need increase , *includes brabant
Denmark - 0.6 M - 0.6 M
*sweden - 0.9 M - 1.2 M #includes finland and gotland
*france - 15 M - 14.1 M #includes flanders and bearn as per info
germany - 12 M - 11.1 M
*Italy - 10.5 M - 15.6 M # info excludes venetian terra firma
norway - 0.3 M - 0.4 M
swiss - 0.65 M - 0.66 M
England - 3.9 M - 4.2 M
*portugal - 1 M - 0.9 M # azores and madiera included in 1 M
*venice - 3.2 M - 3.8 M # includes greek and slavic holdings
*spain - 6.8 M - 7.6 M # navarra not included
albania - 0.2 M - 0.18 M
Bulgaria - 0.8 M - 0.7 M
bohemia - 3.0 M - 2.5 M
hungaria - 1.2 M - 1.8 M
poland - 4.0 M - 2.3 M
*romania - 2.0 M - 1.5 M # molovia, wallachia and rumelia
*yugoslavia - 2.2 M - 1.3 M # serbia, bosnia, croatia and other coastal areas
russia - 16.9 M - 6 M
*ottomans - 8 M - 7 M # includes bosnia and serbia

Basically with these figures and some slight amendments to provinces we can get a reasonable pictures with all things being equal from 1500 and working back to 1419

 

[Herr Doctor]

And another from the book "Europe in the Sixteenth Century" by Koenigsberger, Mosse and Bowler (1968):

Just curious why Moscow is on the place of Kiev?

 

[Bordic]

Just curious why Moscow is on the place of Kiev?

That is indeed a very bad translation...

 

[unmerged(29041)]

We should reach an equilibrated agreement for the entire world in this thread, and then use the population densities to distribute those populations between provinces in each New Map thread.

My own numbers for Spain, Surmvogel numbers for Portugal, and zdlugasz numbers for all of Europe are all in agreement. The numers that we have for Spain and Portugal are very good, based on the 1591 census. We could inflate those numbers by 15% so they agree with Bordic's (Cipolla) numbers, or use zdlugasz numbers that are in complete agreement.
I suggest this second approach because Spain and Portugal 1591 numbers agree quite well with EU2 numbers.

Those numbers then would be:

1600
World Population: 545 million

Europe: 110 million
Western Europe: 72 million
Eastern Europe: 16 million
Former USSR: 20 million

Asia: 342 million

Africa: 68 million


Pre-contact Aztec: 10 million
Pre-contact Inca: 15 million


Spain 7 million
Portugal 1.5 million
France 16 million
HRE 12 million
Italy 11 million
Russia 11 million
Poland+Lithuania 7.5 million
Great Austria 6.5 million
England + Ireland 4 million
Netherlands 1.6 million
Spanish Netherlands 1.4 millions
Sweden + Finland 1 million
Denmark + Norway 0.8 million
Switzerland 0.6 million
Scotland 0.5 million

OE (including North of Africa) 27 million
OE Europe 8 million
OE Crimea 0.5 million
OE Georgia 0.5 million
OE Turkey 7 million
OE Iraq 2.5 million
OE Syria 1.5 million
OE Egypt 4 million
OE Tripoli 0.5 million
OE Algeria/Tlemcen 1.5 million

Morocco 2 million
Shongai: 1 million

West Africa: 22 million
Central Africa: 8 million
East Africa: 5 million
Madagascar: 0.8 million
Somalia: 0.5 million
Ethiopia/Sudan: 5 million
South Sudan: 1 million

Yemen: 2 million
Hedjaz: 1 million

Mughal 108 million
Rest of India: 36 million
China: 120 million
Japan: 17 millions

 

[Bordic]

Switzerland 0.6 million

About Switzerland do we mean province (349) Geneva and (442) Ticino to be counted in that population figure or do we simply mean them respectively as parts of the Duchies of Savoy (ie France region) and of Milan (ie Italy region)?
The main problem here is how to balance MP and BTV in Italy and France with the two new provinces...

And more, the Swiss region has also province 358 Zuerich which increases her amount of provinces from vanilla 2 to 5 in the new map.

0.6 : 5 is a very low level of population growth!

 

[Toio]

We should reach an equilibrated agreement for the entire world in this thread, and then use the population densities to distribute those populations between provinces in each New Map thread.

My own numbers for Spain, Surmvogel numbers for Portugal, and zdlugasz numbers for all of Europe are all in agreement. The numers that we have for Spain and Portugal are very good, based on the 1591 census. We could inflate those numbers by 15% so they agree with Bordic's (Cipolla) numbers, or use zdlugasz numbers that are in complete agreement.
I suggest this second approach because Spain and Portugal 1591 numbers agree quite well with EU2 numbers.

Those numbers then would be:

1600
World Population: 545 million

Europe: 110 million
Western Europe: 72 million
Eastern Europe: 16 million
Former USSR: 20 million

Asia: 342 million

Africa: 68 million


Pre-contact Aztec: 10 million
Pre-contact Inca: 15 million


Spain 7 million
Portugal 1.5 million
France 16 million
HRE 12 million
Italy 11 million
Russia 11 million
Poland+Lithuania 7.5 million
Great Austria 6.5 million
England + Ireland 4 million
Netherlands 1.6 million
Spanish Netherlands 1.4 millions
Sweden + Finland 1 million
Denmark + Norway 0.8 million
Switzerland 0.6 million
Scotland 0.5 million

OE (including North of Africa) 27 million
OE Europe 8 million
OE Crimea 0.5 million
OE Georgia 0.5 million
OE Turkey 7 million
OE Iraq 2.5 million
OE Syria 1.5 million
OE Egypt 4 million
OE Tripoli 0.5 million
OE Algeria/Tlemcen 1.5 million

Morocco 2 million
Shongai: 1 million

West Africa: 22 million
Central Africa: 8 million
East Africa: 5 million
Madagascar: 0.8 million
Somalia: 0.5 million
Ethiopia/Sudan: 5 million
South Sudan: 1 million

Yemen: 2 million
Hedjaz: 1 million

Mughal 108 million
Rest of India: 36 million
China: 120 million
Japan: 17 millions

Just a query on some missing nations.

You have no numbers on Venetian balkan possessions.
To put you in the picture , I have from 1498 the following

2 Millions venetian/veneto in the following areas , Venice, veneto , friuli and istria
another 1.2 million in Venetian held balkan lands of
Zara, dalmatia, spalato, cattaro, durazzo , Greek areas of corfu, Ionion isles, towns of Morea, crete, isles of duchy of naxos and cyprus.

My question is that some population books on Italy have Italy at 11million (actually 10.6) without the venetian/veneto and some books and data have Italy with 13 million which includes venice/veneto.

Which do you have and what about the venetian balkan numbers?

 

[unmerged(29041)]

About Switzerland do we mean province (349) Geneva and (442) Ticino to be counted in that population figure or do we simply mean them respectively as parts of the Duchies of Savoy (ie France region) and of Milan (ie Italy region)?
The main problem here is how to balance MP and BTV in Italy and France with the two new provinces...

And more, the Swiss region has also province 358 Zuerich which increases her amount of provinces from vanilla 2 to 5 in the new map.

0.6 : 5 is a very low level of population growth!

The data is generally related to 1600 borders, so in the case of Sweden it includes Finland and Estonia. The same should be the case for Switzerland. In 1600, Geneva cannot be considered part of Savoy, but it did not join Switzerland until much later.

60,000 citizens for 5 provinces is not that bad. Density population maps, including the one you posted show Switzerland at 5-20 inhabitants per square kilometer, which is low. Every single one of those provinces will be above 5k, and several above 10K. The same cannot be said for a lot of places in Northern and Eastern Europe.

 

[unmerged(29041)]

Just a query on some missing nations.

You have no numbers on Venetian balkan possessions.
To put you in the picture , I have from 1498 the following

2 Millions venetian/veneto in the following areas , Venice, veneto , friuli and istria
another 1.2 million in Venetian held balkan lands of
Zara, dalmatia, spalato, cattaro, durazzo , Greek areas of corfu, Ionion isles, towns of Morea, crete, isles of duchy of naxos and cyprus.

The data must be of around 1600 to be valid. Two million people in Veneto sounds like an awful lot of people. I would like to see that data from sources that also talk about numbers in other places, to see that they do not come from someone moving in the upper ranges. You find almost all kind of data about population, as some people is very optimistic when transforming households (fireplaces) into actual people.

We will obviously have to fill in for nations, but making sure that at the end the whole of Europe is somewhere around 110 million people in 1600.