sylla1

Please check out the same passage (and the note 11) within this carefully reviewed translation LacusCurtius ? Diodorus Siculus ? Book*I Chapters*30?41 :
BTW, regarding any serious research, being confused is not something any researchers are "accused" of; this is not religion, you know.
(Especially if the original source of the "confusion" had already been pointed out by yours truly)
If you don't want people to point out any inaccuracies, just ignore my posts; I would be then just writing for the other historumites here.

Back to the OP, there would be fundamental consensus of the major sources on the population of the Augustan Aegyptus.
This is BTW the general figure used by Scheidel's team at Stamford and most other paleo-demographers I'm aware of.

RollingWave

That is because they are examianing just Carthage itself and not the entire area.

Populations Crises and Population Cycles

This article is a pretty good read on this debate in general. it points out that most of the Maghreb and Egypt / Middle east Area can be extremely fertile when properly irrigated, but overirregation and/or lack of sustained matainance can quickly reverse the trend dramatically. thus you see massive ups and downs on the population figure in this area.

Add to the fact that these areas are mostly open exposed plain to more nomadic (be them desert nomads or stepp nomads) invasion, the picture becomes more clear.

it has a nice picture on the estimates of ancient egypt as well.



In Tunisia, the early 11th century onward's caused dramatic shift for the area that is still present today, Berbers as a ethnic and cultural began a full retreat and they became mostly arabized in a few hundred years.

RollingWave

Another article that have some interesting pointers to that, this is a very important thread and we really should give much more serious academic look into this. since economy is traditionally an overlooked aspect of traditional (and popular) history, while obviously agriculture is one of the most important pre-industrial revolution base of any economy.

Modern Israel is a good testimony to the general issue of that area, it is a land of mostly semi-arid land at best, but with enough proper irrigation / maintenance it actually can be very productive. Israel is actually a net exporter in agricultural products. despite a pretty high population density for a country in that region.

tomar

Yes.. Unfortunately that article is a poorly written marketing brochure at best...

Israel (Neguev desert excepted) and Lebanon have some of the best real estate agriculture, forest and water resource wise in that area. (to the East is the Sinai desert, to the west and south is the Jordanian and Syrian desert) This is why -quite aside from religion - that area was (and still is) so extensively fought about

Guaporense

Very interesting population figures (the Asia Minor figures are actually in the range of the figures that I have in another tread: 12 million). Modern scholarship still uses Beloch's estimates. Though they were adjusted upwards by a significant margin in some cases.

For instance the population of Attica in 430 BC is now usually estimated at 300,000 to 350,000, while in the 4th century it was around 250,000 (instead of the 250,000 and 130,000 to 200,000 given by Beloch). Boetia has an estimated population around 165,000 to 250,000 (instead of the 150,000 to 250,000 figures given by Beloch).

Roman Italy now has a population estimated between 8 to 13 million, instead of 6 million given by Beloch. North Africa has now 7-8 million people instead of 3-4 million as given by Beloch (though North Africa is from the Roman period, 200 years earlier it's population may have been lower).

Guaporense

From: The Cambridge Economic History of the Graeco-Roman World

For the late 1st century ad:

(land area in sq kilometers)

Region ---------------- land area --------------- population

Italy ------------------- 310,000 ----------------- 8 to 13 million (density up to 40 per square kilometer)
Gaul & Germany ---- 680,000 ------------------ 9 to 12 million
Iberia ----------------- 600,000 ------------------ 7 to 9 million
Britain ----------------- 160,000 ----------------- 1.5 to 2 million
Danubian region ---- 660,000 ----------------- 5 to 6 million
Greece ---------------- 161,000 ----------------- 2.5 to 3 million

total European provinces: 33 to 45 million

Anatolia -------------- 650,000 ----------------- 9 to 12 million
Syria ------------------ 140,000 ----------------- 5 to 6 million

total Asian provinces: 14 to 18 million

Egypt ----------------- 35,000 ------------------- 5 to 6 million
North Africa ---------- 450,000 ----------------- 7 to 8 million

total African provinces: 12 to 14 million

Total population Roman Empire: 59 million to 77 million (average: 68 million)

(note: total land area 3.85 million square kilometers, do not include desertic areas of the Roman Empire nor some areas under temporary Roman control or too peripheric, such as Northern Britain, Mesopotamia, Dacia, Judea, also do not include Armenia and Bosphorus, two Roman vassal states never formaly integrated into the empire, the Roman Empire had 5,700,000 square kilometers at it's peak territory, 1.85 million more than these areas, though the population density of these peripheric lands was lower)

If one adjusts for the entire population of all Roman areas under Rome's control at the death of Trajan, such as Mesopotamia, Judea, Northern Britain, Dacia, Armenia and Bosphorus one can increase the estimated population of the empire by around 10 million, up to a total high end population near 90 million:

Adding (my conservative guesstimates):

Judea - 1.5 million
Mesopotamia - 4 million
Armenia - 2 million
Dacia - 1 million
Bosphorus - 1 million

yields: 69 to 87 million

Or adding the additional 1.85 million square kilometers of unnacounted lands, at a conservative density of 5 per square kilometer, yields 9-10 million additional inhabitants, increasing the total population to the 69 to 87 million figures.

The total population inside the Roman sphere of influence, including Parthia and the Germanic tribes was probably up to 100 million.

Guaporense

Also, field surveys in Italy and North Africa have yielded population densities around 200 BC at ~60-70% of their 1st century (peak) levels, so considering that Carthage dominated all of North Africa directly and indirectly (450,000 square kilometers) and about 30-40% of the Iberian landmass I would guess it's population levels at:

region ------------ area ----------- pop
North Africa ----- 450,000 ------- 4.5 to 5 million
Iberia ------------ 200,000 ------- 1.5 to 2 million



total population, Carthaginian Empire: 6 to 7 million (around 10% of less of the population of the Roman Empire 250 years later)

For the Roman Republic:
region --------- area ----------- pop
Italy ----------- 310,000 ------- 5 to 8 million

So we have: Carthage with around 6-7 million and Rome with around 5 to 8 million. The Second Punic War involved territories with around 15 million people.

Guaporense

That one is complicated, also by chronological factors: Greece's population peaked around 350 BC, while Egypt's population peaked 300-400 years later.

Mainland Greece's proper land area was 78,000 square kilometers. Considering the fertility of the local soil it was estimated that rainfall agriculture without fertilizers could support a population density of 25 to 40 inhabitants per square kilometer, giving Classical Greece with a total population of only between 2 to 3 million, assuming that the Ancient Greek economy was based only on subsistence rainfall agriculture. For example, in the 1889 census, Greece still had a population of only 2.2 million.

But Classical Greek agriculture was not simple subsistence agriculture, we know that in Classical Greece agriculture was often commercial and made heavy use of fertilizers and also many if not most Greek cities imported food on a regular basis. The most radical example, Athens, managed to become so dependend on imported food that their port became more important than the agricultural hintherlands of Attica. Boetia also had a much higher population density than given by the subsistence rainfall agriculture ceiling:

Some population densities:

region -------- area ---------- pop
Boeotia ------ 2,500 --------- 165,000 to 250,000 (density: 66 to 100)
Attica --------- 2,500 --------- 250,000 to 350,000 (density: 100 to 140)
Macedon ---- 32,000 ------- 660,000 (density: 21)
Epirus -------- 20,000 ------ 400,000 (density: 20)

In Boeotia and Attica between 40% to 80% of the food had to be imported, while Macedonia was mostly self sufficient. We also know that the city of Mytilene imported at least 100,000 medimnoi of grain, enough to feed 20,000 to 25,000 people, and the city state had an area of 500 square kilometers, boosting it's probable population from 15,000 - 20,000 to 35,000 to 45,000, which mens that around 60% of the food was imported. While Athens imported between 500,000 to 1,000,000 medimnoi of grain, enough to feed up to 125,000 to 250,000 people.

The walled areas of the cities also give an impression of the very high population density of Central Greece:



Some walled areas of major cities only in central Greece:

Athens: 511 hectares (city+port, not including the long walls)
Argos: 200 hectares
Corinth: 650 hectares
Thebes: 350 hectares
Megara: 140 hectares
Sikyon: 175 hectares

total: 2,026 hectares

In average the escavated city blocks of Greek cities had 35 houses per hectare, each house had around 5.5 inhabitants, giving a density of 200 persons per hectare. If all this walled area were filled out with urban areas we would have a total urban population in the major cities of central Greece of 405,00, that in an area of ca 9,000 square kilometers (2,150 in Argolid, 2,300 in Corinthia, 5,000 in Attica and Boeotia), surpassing the carrying capacity of the land. Overall, these lands probably imported over 50% of their food.

I could organize the a conservative estimation of the population in Greece as:

region ------------------- area ---------- pop
High density core ----- 10,000 ------- 1,000,000 (imported 60% of their food)
Medium density -------- 30,000 ------- 1,500,000 (imported 30% of their food)
Low density ------------ 40,000 ------- 1,000,000 (did not import food)

total: 3.5 million in mainland Greece proper, with food imports enough for over 1 million people, adding Epirus and Macedonia gives a total conservative population of 4.5 million in classical mainland Greece. Adding Ionia, Crete and Rhodes pushes it up to 6 million.

Egypt had populations estimated between 3.5 to 8 million. Usually the population is Egypt is estimated as 5 to 6 million, distributed over 35,000 square kilometers at a ultra high density of 160 per square kilometer, enabled by the Nile based agriculture, it was distributed as:

500,000-600,000 in Alexandria
700,000 to 800,000 in the 30 Nome capitals
4 - 4.5 million in the countryside

RollingWave

Great post mate

sylla1

Just the kind of quality, hard evidence and careful analysis that our Guaporense has made his personal routine all along Historum