How many additional people would Rostov have right now if it became Russia's capital in the 19th or early 20th century?

[Futurist]

How many additional people would Rostov-on-Don have right now if it became Russia's capital in the 19th or early 20th century? It seems to me that, had Tsarist Russia considered relocating its capital once more, Rostov might have made an ideal location. That way, Russia would have had a great city on the Baltic Sea (Petrograd), in its center (Moscow), and on the Black Sea (Rostov).

Rostov currently has a little over a million people, but I was wondering how much larger its population (and also, the population of its suburbs--which in real life appear to be almost nonexistent) would have been had the Russian Empire moved its capital there sometime in the 19th or early 20th century and had Russia subsequently avoided Communist rule.

Any thoughts on this?

 

[Futurist]

@Visigoth Panzer: Any thoughts on this?

 

[Visigoth Panzer]

A good comparison would be with St. Petersburg and Moscow after they became the capitals. St. Petersburg had a population of over 2 million in 1900 and currently has 6.2 million (even though it is no longer the capital). Moscow currently has 13.2 million (in city limits), around 1900 it was around 1 million. It doubled by 1926 and doubled again by 1939. Rostov's population was a little over 120,000 in 1900, so assuming a similar growth rate to Moscow (x13) it would be around 1.6 million. This however, seems too low for a capital, so we should take into account the millions of people that would move to the new center of the country. This is where St. Petersburg come in. Its population tripled since 1900, we will assume Moscow does as well and subtract the remainder and add it to Rostov. This gives a population of around 11-12 million (not counting any potential suburbs/metro areas).

 

[Futurist]

What remainder are you subtracting here?

EDIT: I got it. You're saying that, instead of its real life growth rate, Moscow only grows 3x during the last 120 years whereas the rest of Moscow's population (in real life) will live in Rostov in this scenario due to it becoming Russia's new capital.

 

[Visigoth Panzer]

What remainder are you subtracting here?

EDIT: I got it. You're saying that, instead of its real life growth rate, Moscow only grows 3x during the last 120 years whereas the rest of Moscow's population (in real life) will live in Rostov in this scenario due to it becoming Russia's new capital.

Yeah, best estimate I could speculate on.

 

[Futurist]

That makes sense.

I do wonder if St. Pete's would have actually had Moscow's population while Moscow would have had St. Pete's population had St. Pete's remained Russia's capital after 1917, though.

 

[Visigoth Panzer]

That makes sense.

I do wonder if St. Pete's would have actually had Moscow's population while Moscow would have had St. Pete's population had St. Pete's remained Russia's capital after 1917, though.

Possibly, Moscow had half the population of St. Petersburg in 1900. Being the capital in Russia attracts a lot of people.

 

[Futurist]

Makes sense.

Also, I'm presuming that, in this scenario, Rostov is going to have a lot more suburbs than it has in real life, no?

 

[Visigoth Panzer]

Makes sense.

Also, I'm presuming that, in this scenario, Rostov is going to have a lot more suburbs than it has in real life, no?

Makes sense.

Also, I'm presuming that, in this scenario, Rostov is going to have a lot more suburbs than it has in real life, no?

Most likely, it would spark development of the region.

 

[Futurist]

Makes sense.

Also, FYI, you double-quoted my post above.