New OOTS products from CafePress
New OOTS t-shirts, ornaments, mugs, bags, and more
Results 1 to 15 of 15
  1. - Top - End - #1
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    ElfWarriorGuy

    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    United States
    Gender
    Male

    Default Deriving Population

    You who are knowledgeable about ancient land use and demographics, this one's for you. I'd like help deciding on the population of a tribal kingdom dwelling on an archipelago.



    The map is drawn with 3-mile hexes, which means each hex is about 7.8 square miles.

    The map is color-coded by land use:

    Dark Grey: Mountains (45 hexes, 351 square miles)
    Dark Green: Forest (92 hexes, 717.6 square miles)
    Medium Green: Pasture (208 hexes, 1622.4 square miles)
    Pale Green: Farmland (167 hexes, 1302.6 square miles)

    The archipelago has 552.5 miles of habitable (non-mountainous) coastline.

    So first of all I'd like to figure out the largest population this land could support with Iron Age-ish technology. Long-distance trade between the archipelago and the mainland involves a difficult and dangerous voyage over open ocean.

    Finding historical estimates for how many people could be supported by a given amount of farmland isn't too difficult; more difficult is figuring out how other subsistence activities, namely hunting, fishing, and pastoralism, affect population density, especially when these activities are done in conjunction with farming. I also don't know how to figure out how timber resources act as a limit on growth. If you have rules of thumb to share from history, that'd be great!

    After getting some ranges of possible maximum populations, are those populations still small enough that it could exist under a single tribal kingship (which is itself a confederation of a number of clans)? Are there any settlement or migration patterns you would expect to see based on the map and the provided figures?

    EDIT: Should have also specified a temperate climate.
    Last edited by Catullus64; 2022-10-27 at 10:40 AM.
    The desire to appear clever often impedes actually being so.

    What makes the vanity of others offensive is the fact that it wounds our own.

    Quarrels don't last long if the fault is only on one side.

    Nothing is given so generously as advice.

    We hardly ever find anyone of good sense, except those who agree with us.

    -Francois, Duc de La Rochefoucauld

  2. - Top - End - #2
    Troll in the Playground
     
    HalflingPirate

    Join Date
    Nov 2011

    Default Re: Deriving Population

    Consider each square mile divided into four 'farms' which can each support a family. Productivity of each farm determines the size of the family. Iron Age tech makes farming easier, so not as many are needed to operate them and a surplus can be sold for profit.

    Now, a quarter of a square mile, (1/2mi x 1/2mi) can support a sheep farm in Scotland or a beef farm in Wyoming, or a cornfield in Mississippi, or a banana plantation in Costa Rica. The family can subsist off of the land and sell a cash crop too. Profitability is determined by the market for the product, (usually low because prices are local, and everyone sells the same thing.)

    So, families of 4-12 are not uncommon, and market towns of 10% of the regional population are easily maintained. Consider a 10 mile radius as a regional boundary for walkers, 20 mile radius for riders.

    Cities are consumers. Cities in the Iron Age rarely export, but may be trade hubs, selling regional merchandise on a larger scale to other regions. Their ability to import determines their size, be that through lucrative trade, tribute, or conquest.

  3. - Top - End - #3
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Flumph

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Santa Barbara, CA
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Deriving Population

    Honestly. This can be most of whatever you want it to be.
    Why? because you control the fertility of the land and the crops available (including ones unique to your world that are capable of supporting the population you want)

    Because crops matter. the Musket wars of New Zealand were fueled in part by population explosions produced by the importation of the potato. Which similarly moved the center of European civilization north as the historical issues of semiregular famine were under a buckwheat and wheat focused system were eased.

    So pick what you want and work the support system to match. As long as it is internally consistent it will be fine. What are you aiming for?

    If you want a historical reference point I would look up population densities for the Srivijaya Empire (a tropical archipelago based Iron age civ with large fishing and some hunting systems). Similarly you can use historical data to look at various Roman and Byzantine provinces that have fishing as a staple. Looking at Crete + Cyrene, and the area of modern Greece would be my bet.

  4. - Top - End - #4
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Jasdoif's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Oregon, USA
    Feytouched Banana eldritch disciple avatar by...me!

    The Index of the Giant's Comments VI―Making Dogma from Zapped Bananas

  5. - Top - End - #5
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    Griffon

    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Location
    NW PA
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Deriving Population

    Quote Originally Posted by Catullus64 View Post
    You who are knowledgeable about ancient land use and demographics, this one's for you. I'd like help deciding on the population of a tribal kingdom dwelling on an archipelago.



    The map is drawn with 3-mile hexes, which means each hex is about 7.8 square miles.

    The map is color-coded by land use:

    Dark Grey: Mountains (45 hexes, 351 square miles)
    Dark Green: Forest (92 hexes, 717.6 square miles)
    Medium Green: Pasture (208 hexes, 1622.4 square miles)
    Pale Green: Farmland (167 hexes, 1302.6 square miles)

    The archipelago has 552.5 miles of habitable (non-mountainous) coastline.

    So first of all I'd like to figure out the largest population this land could support with Iron Age-ish technology. Long-distance trade between the archipelago and the mainland involves a difficult and dangerous voyage over open ocean.

    Finding historical estimates for how many people could be supported by a given amount of farmland isn't too difficult; more difficult is figuring out how other subsistence activities, namely hunting, fishing, and pastoralism, affect population density, especially when these activities are done in conjunction with farming. I also don't know how to figure out how timber resources act as a limit on growth. If you have rules of thumb to share from history, that'd be great!

    After getting some ranges of possible maximum populations, are those populations still small enough that it could exist under a single tribal kingship (which is itself a confederation of a number of clans)? Are there any settlement or migration patterns you would expect to see based on the map and the provided figures?

    EDIT: Should have also specified a temperate climate.
    Herding & Grazing:

    Depending on the quality of the "forage" (ie grass), a typical Cow will need 1 Acre of land. To calculate actual "forage," take the height of the grass in INCHES and multiply it by 200 to get the amount of forage, in POUNDS, a given acre holds. A typical cow or horse will eat (or trample) 5% of its body weight a day. As you can see, livestock can require a lot of land. Sheep, goats, llamas, camels, and yak are known as "browsers" and will eat plants that a horse won't touch. Increase the amount of forage for them by 20% after doing the calculation above.

    Farming:

    A typical human can provide support for themselves on an acre of good land. Working with draft animals & hand tools a single human can prep, plow, and then plant an acre in a week of hard work (thus you can see why farmers have lots of kids). Prep occurs either in the late winter or early spring, and involves "seasoning" the field with manure, crushed lime, and phosphorus (from dead fish or mineral deposits). Plowing & planting take a week and are self-explanatory.

    Thus, by getting an acreage count, you can determine the number of people the food supply can support. An acre of land is roughly analogous to a US football field (100 yards long X 50 yards wide). Assume most farms are only a day's walk from a population center (about 10 miles) to determine the amount of farmland.

  6. - Top - End - #6
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    ElfWarriorGuy

    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    United States
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Deriving Population

    Quote Originally Posted by sktarq View Post
    Honestly. This can be most of whatever you want it to be.
    Why? because you control the fertility of the land and the crops available (including ones unique to your world that are capable of supporting the population you want)

    Because crops matter. the Musket wars of New Zealand were fueled in part by population explosions produced by the importation of the potato. Which similarly moved the center of European civilization north as the historical issues of semiregular famine were under a buckwheat and wheat focused system were eased.

    So pick what you want and work the support system to match. As long as it is internally consistent it will be fine. What are you aiming for?

    If you want a historical reference point I would look up population densities for the Srivijaya Empire (a tropical archipelago based Iron age civ with large fishing and some hunting systems). Similarly you can use historical data to look at various Roman and Byzantine provinces that have fishing as a staple. Looking at Crete + Cyrene, and the area of modern Greece would be my bet.
    My real goal is a population & density that fits the society that I have in mind.

    The people I have in mind are a non-state society. This tribe is a confederation of five major clans which claim direct descent from one of the major deities; each of these clans, and their various lesser 'client' clans, are ruled by councils of elders.

    The tribe as a whole has a single king appointed by a tribe-wide assembly. This king's power is mainly customary rather than coercive: he or she arbitrates inter-clan disputes where possible, organizes and leads coalitions to raid the mainlanders, and serves as high priest of the tribe's chief god and (supposed) universal ancestor. What coercive power the king does have comes down to his or her own private resources, clients, and magical powers.

    So I guess what I'm partly after is an economy and population at the upper bound of what could be administered via such a system. I had imagined sheep, pigs, and cereal grains as the backbone of subsistence, because that's what's more familiar to me via the European source tradition, but I'm very much open to ideas outside that sphere, particularly regarding the impact of lots of fishing.

    The clan councils part is where I feel some particular difficulty, because that's a form of government that seems to rely pretty heavily on its members knowing most of the people they govern on a personal level. In order to scale that up to larger population numbers (100,000+), you need to have a lot of very small clan groups with these councils, and that's just too much work for me as a writer to flesh out.
    The desire to appear clever often impedes actually being so.

    What makes the vanity of others offensive is the fact that it wounds our own.

    Quarrels don't last long if the fault is only on one side.

    Nothing is given so generously as advice.

    We hardly ever find anyone of good sense, except those who agree with us.

    -Francois, Duc de La Rochefoucauld

  7. - Top - End - #7
    Troll in the Playground
     
    HalflingPirate

    Join Date
    Nov 2011

    Default Re: Deriving Population

    Fishing depends on boats. Boats depend on lumber. Lumber depends on forests. Forests are lousy for food production.

    Fishing is highly dependent upon location. There are vast stretches of ocean that are empty most of the time, and others that are extremely productive. There are regions where the day/night cycle dictates what is available. But fishing only replaces protein.

    Something has to fill the requirements for sugars and starches, for green vegetables, and dietary fibers. Unless your lumber is sourced from elsewhere, (Alaskan and Canadian timber floating out to sea, drifting on currents to Hawaii, for example,) your fishing culture may end up like Rapa Nui.

    Fishing may create greater population density around the ports, but overall population is still highly dependant on farms. Supplement with seaweed and algae for more productivity per acre.

  8. - Top - End - #8
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Flumph

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Santa Barbara, CA
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Deriving Population

    Quote Originally Posted by Catullus64 View Post
    My real goal is a population & density that fits the society that I have in mind.

    The people I have in mind are a non-state society. This tribe is a confederation of five major clans which claim direct descent from one of the major deities; each of these clans, and their various lesser 'client' clans, are ruled by councils of elders.

    The tribe as a whole has a single king appointed by a tribe-wide assembly. This king's power is mainly customary rather than coercive: he or she arbitrates inter-clan disputes where possible, organizes and leads coalitions to raid the mainlanders, and serves as high priest of the tribe's chief god and (supposed) universal ancestor. What coercive power the king does have comes down to his or her own private resources, clients, and magical powers.

    So I guess what I'm partly after is an economy and population at the upper bound of what could be administered via such a system. I had imagined sheep, pigs, and cereal grains as the backbone of subsistence, because that's what's more familiar to me via the European source tradition, but I'm very much open to ideas outside that sphere, particularly regarding the impact of lots of fishing.

    The clan councils part is where I feel some particular difficulty, because that's a form of government that seems to rely pretty heavily on its members knowing most of the people they govern on a personal level. In order to scale that up to larger population numbers (100,000+), you need to have a lot of very small clan groups with these councils, and that's just too much work for me as a writer to flesh out.
    Firstly carrying capacity of a given bit a ground is so wildly variable that "how much land does a sheep need?" isn't actually a very useful question. People thought they knew the answer to that when they brought sheep to Australia for example. And they did have pretty good numbers for how many sheep you could keep per sq mile for England but when they put that many sheep on the land the ecosystem around even the most fertile parts of Australia (the Darling Murray area) just upped and died. Major problems even today. So what to do? I'd look for a RW nation with a comparable climate and look for what their dept of agriculture or their sheep council says (seriously most have things like this) in order to get your numbers. But really pick the outcome you want and enrich or deplete the carrying capacity to match.

    Okay for that social system. I'd start looking at British Raj era sources about afghanistan. Where basically you had clan local leaders (who knew most of their local clan population) who were dispersed but met often who then a higher level of clan leaders drawn from this layer by a mix of history and acclaim. Those senior tribal leaders were often drawn into groups around particularly powerful tribes.. . . sometime called confederations of tribes or allied groups. You can read about the US invasions about how it still looks today if you want to get into the nitty gritty of what it may feel like for your players with their more (probably) Western mindsets in dealing with a highly tribal society. Even with a rather large population it could lack much in the way of centralized power and be more a matter of influence which sounds in line with what you want....And that Afghani system was up to about 4 million people by the by (Afghanistan in the 1800's). So such a socio-politial system works fine for even a greater scale than I think you are looking for.

    As for numbers. High fertility zones can feed people at a full family per acre, even quite large ones, but that is exceptional (example Rwanda) and very unlikely to be widespread but could be possible near major population centres. Also highly fruitful fishing grounds can willy effect the system. In part because they can draw nutrients from far off and deliver them to the area in question. Very rich seafood systems basically supported the Pacific NW peoples in North America at high density rates. Though if you had a large seasonal abundance (say like the salmon or Herring runs of real life) that could then be smoked/salted/etc it would both give a good reason for people to develop preservation and trade systems, help maintain populations during famine years (key for long term growth), and feeding people during longer term travel (raids, trade trips etc). So how large a patch of ocean is seasonally funneling nutrients to your target archipelago is pretty much up to you and thus how much extra food the society has access to. Even without it pretty high densities can be achieved looking to say .4-.7 people per acre in a mostly vegetable garden and fishing technically stone age region (precontact Tahiti and Marquesas and that is for TOTAL area not the fully cultivated area)

    Also how developed do you want these islands to be? Bustling where almost every acre has an owner and is under some sort of farming or silvaculture work? (also how much silvaculture they do will radically change how much impact they have on forests needing lumber etc). Or is the place mostly wild with only the richest coasts really heavily settles with exploration and ruins for adventurers on the ridgetops? Because take however much wildlands you wand to have and cut that percentage area out from your total available area when it comes to population numbers once you come up with a carrying capacity. And if most people are in a minority of the physical area they will probably be in the agriculturally richest area and you'll want to use higher end estimates for carrying capacity if they cover most of the island you'll want to use a lower carrying capacity as more than just the most ideal land comes under cultivation.

    Also think about social stability- in places with high levels of stability long term investment makes sense. Which in the case of iron age agriculture will be things like irrigation, terracing, aquaculture, and the like when it comes to foodstuffs and thus carrying capacity. Each of these need regular maintenance and that will cause issues if someone doesn't think they will be on the same land in a generation. Now even in some conflict zones these can work to some degree (see how old some terracing in places like Iran is-world heritage site lookup). So if you run the numbers above and want more you do have options.
    Last edited by sktarq; 2022-10-11 at 05:56 PM.

  9. - Top - End - #9
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Yakk's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2006

    Default Re: Deriving Population

    At the bottom, 1 km^2 of well cultivated productive land (including roads and the like) is about 70 people fed. But 2/3 of the land being cultivated is really high (everywhere has "badlands").

    So aim for a cap of 25 people per km^2 for heavily developed "safe" lands. Less in cold polar areas, more in more fertile lands (+/- 50%). Less developed lands can easily by 90% less than this as well.

    Hunter gatherer peak density is 1% to 10% of that. Like, 1 person per km^2 supported.

    Fishing ups the density a tad. But not too much; fishing wasn't enough to displace grain even in places like scotland.
    Last edited by Yakk; 2022-10-14 at 07:33 PM.

  10. - Top - End - #10
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Location
    Florida
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Deriving Population

    As I see it, you can have the five "nations" be a sort of "unnatural" extra layer of organization. Each nation consists of many tribes, but you can (when doing a scene) do with just one tribe leader from each have have that fairly represent almost everyone.

    Quote Originally Posted by sktarq
    So I guess what I'm partly after is an economy and population at the upper bound of what could be administered via such a system.
    Why do you want it at the upper bound? Sense of scale? The ability to have a variety of adventures in the Archipelago? You want it to have a non-trival size compared to state societies in your system?
    The thing is the Azurites don't use a single color; they use a single hue. The use light blue, dark blue, black, white, glossy blue, off-white with a bluish tint. They sky's the limit, as long as it's blue.

  11. - Top - End - #11
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    ElfWarriorGuy

    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    United States
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Deriving Population

    Quote Originally Posted by Quizatzhaderac View Post
    Why do you want it at the upper bound? Sense of scale? The ability to have a variety of adventures in the Archipelago? You want it to have a non-trival size compared to state societies in your system?
    For dramatic purposes; to tell a story about this system of tribal government as it struggles to scale up to governing progressively larger population & wealth, and feels the pressure of competing with even larger, state-organized civilizations.
    The desire to appear clever often impedes actually being so.

    What makes the vanity of others offensive is the fact that it wounds our own.

    Quarrels don't last long if the fault is only on one side.

    Nothing is given so generously as advice.

    We hardly ever find anyone of good sense, except those who agree with us.

    -Francois, Duc de La Rochefoucauld

  12. - Top - End - #12
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Amechra's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Where I live.

    Default Re: Deriving Population

    You can pretty safely ignore pastoralism when calculating your population — agriculture is simply far more efficient than anything else when it comes to the amount of population you can support, so other strategies are going to essentially end up being background noise. This is, of course, assuming that you're thinking of pastoralism in the sense of transhumanance (AKA the herders are ultimately part of the same culture as the farmers), and not in the sense of, say, nomadic herders (who are their own thing, and need a LOT of space).

    The more important questions: What are your farmers cultivating (rice and wheat lead to very different population densities)? Is there any magic floating around that would futz with agricultural efficiency? Do you have any magic that would make textile production more efficient (AKA: are women available for general farm labor)?
    Quote Originally Posted by segtrfyhtfgj View Post
    door is a fake exterior wall
    If you see me try to discuss the nitty-gritty of D&D 5e, kindly point me to my signature and remind me that I shouldn't. Please and thank you!

  13. - Top - End - #13
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    ElfWarriorGuy

    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    United States
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Deriving Population

    Quote Originally Posted by Amechra View Post
    The more important questions: What are your farmers cultivating (rice and wheat lead to very different population densities)? Is there any magic floating around that would futz with agricultural efficiency? Do you have any magic that would make textile production more efficient (AKA: are women available for general farm labor)?
    I was initially assuming some kind of cereal cultivation, simply because that's what I'm familiar with. But now I'm considering changing it just for the sake of novelty. Perhaps legumes of some sort? I don't know of any real-world culture where legumes were the main crop, but I also know that my knowledge isn't very broad.

    The only relevant magical element I can think of is that the agricultural deities require a large number of livestock sacrifices (which are efficacious, not just superstition), so the pastoral activities do have a strong indirect impact on agricultural production.

    As for textile production (funny you should ask), there is a magic distaff & spindle which can spin anything into thread (wool, linen, iron, gold, water, fire, air, a dog barking, a lover's oath, a man's doom, limited only by the skill of the spinner), but that seems unlikely to affect overall textile production since it's the heirloom of one rich family.
    The desire to appear clever often impedes actually being so.

    What makes the vanity of others offensive is the fact that it wounds our own.

    Quarrels don't last long if the fault is only on one side.

    Nothing is given so generously as advice.

    We hardly ever find anyone of good sense, except those who agree with us.

    -Francois, Duc de La Rochefoucauld

  14. - Top - End - #14
    Troll in the Playground
     
    HalflingPirate

    Join Date
    Nov 2011

    Default Re: Deriving Population

    Cereals became dominant crops because they are starchy. Starch is a complex carbohydrate that is built up from and breaks down into sugar, which makes cereals good energy foods. Other carbs are out there, like quinoa, amaranth, and a wide variety of beans, and most of these include a hearty portion of protein along with the carbs.

    Seeds are portable and store able, unlike, for example, watermelons. Pumpkin seeds, sunflower seeds, and tree nuts, among other things, can be stored for later use with very little preservation effort. This was also a big reason for grains as a primary crop. Can you imagine holding out for lettuce for a year-round staple?

  15. - Top - End - #15
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Location
    Florida
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Deriving Population

    Quote Originally Posted by Catullus64 View Post
    I was initially assuming some kind of cereal cultivation, simply because that's what I'm familiar with. But now I'm considering changing it just for the sake of novelty. Perhaps legumes of some sort? I don't know of any real-world culture where legumes were the main crop, but I also know that my knowledge isn't very broad.
    For a temperate climate it has to be cereals or roots . Your real life choice are maize, wheat, potatoes, and maybe soy or rice at the warmer end of temperate.

    You could also have new staple crop recently introduced and a growing population along with it.

    With rice comes the need to build complicated water works and manage the rivers and streams.

    With maize and potatoes, the labor per food grown is lower than wheat/ rice, so you would more idle people find new kinds of work.
    The thing is the Azurites don't use a single color; they use a single hue. The use light blue, dark blue, black, white, glossy blue, off-white with a bluish tint. They sky's the limit, as long as it's blue.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •