Top Ten Empires by Percentage of World Population

The fact the Persians, in some manifestation (Parthians, Sassanids) or another were a thorn in the side of the Roman Empire for multiple centuries is one of the most overlooked aspects of world history! They had some incredible battles, and without the Persians to stop them, the Romans may have easily spread Western culture throughout the Middle East and to the Indian subcontinent.

Originally posted by Guaporense The estimates that put Persian population at 18 million are very conservative. They base their estimates on the distribution of the modern world population and they regress modern numbers to the ancient dates, assuming a certain world population. For instance, China is though to have 20-25% of the world population in many points in history, so they assume that China had 30 million people right in 300 BCE, when the world had 150 million people. However the distribution of the world population 2400 years ago was very different. For example, Greece was much more densely populated in classical times than in the early 20th century. In 350 BCE it has been estimated that the region of Boeotia in central Greece had 200,000 inhabitants, while in the 1889 census the same region had 42,000 inhabitants and today it has 130,000 inhabitants. Greece as a whole had 9 million people in 350 BCE (counting Magna Graecia, Greece proper, Western Asia minor and the greek colonies spread throughout the mediterranean), or about 6% of the world's population at the time. We know that because Mogens Herman Hansen has used modern methods for estimating the population of Greece using the walled area of cities and knowing that as a city state culture, most greeks lived in cities. Classical Greece depended on imported grain and the heavy use of fertilizers to maintain their high population density. Their economy was very advanced, probably much more advanced than China and India at the time. Polen data shows that agricultural production in the eastern mediterranean peaked in the period from 500 BCE to 200 BCE. So at the time of Alexander his part of the world was very densely populated. So the Persian Empire probably had a bigger proportion of the world population than suggested by the 18 million figure. Egypt alone had at least 5 million people and probably 7-8 million, not 3.5 million and the Persian Empire had probably 35 million people. About 25% of the world's population. Also, with a territory of 7-8 million square kilometers, a population of 18 million would be too small to allow a population density for this empire to effectively rule over their domain. The Roman Empire probably had 70 million people, but estimates vary from 60 million to well over 100 million. Considering that Greece achieved 9 million people, the whole Roman Empire could have acheived over 100 million. So they are a serious candidate for an empire with more than 40% of the world's population inside their borders.

Edited by honeybee - 16-Oct-2011 at 21:56

Carrying capacity is perhaps a useful concept but it is not fixed, as technology and the intensity of land use and the importation of foodstuffs can greatly change the number of people that can be feed on a certain quantity of land.

Originally posted by Guaporense The Roman Empire ruled a larger proportion of the civilized world than the Persians. As can be attested by ancient historians. The Persians didn't rule the following civilized lands: most of India, China, Italy, Carthage's empire and most Greek cities. The bulk of the civilized world was not ruled by Persia.

The Roman Empire ruled a larger proportion of the civilized world than the Persians. As can be attested by ancient historians.

The Persians didn't rule the following civilized lands: most of India, China, Italy, Carthage's empire and most Greek cities. The bulk of the civilized world was not ruled by Persia.

The estimates that put Persian population at 18 million are very conservative. They base their estimates on the distribution of the modern world population and they regress modern numbers to the ancient dates, assuming a certain world population. For instance, China is though to have 20-25% of the world population in many points in history, so they assume that China had 30 million people right in 300 BCE, when the world had 150 million people.

However the distribution of the world population 2400 years ago was very different. For example, Greece was much more densely populated in classical times than in the early 20th century. In 350 BCE it has been estimated that the region of Boeotia in central Greece had 200,000 inhabitants, while in the 1889 census the same region had 42,000 inhabitants and today it has 130,000 inhabitants. Greece as a whole had 9 million people in 350 BCE (counting Magna Graecia, Greece proper, Western Asia minor and the greek colonies spread throughout the mediterranean), or about 6% of the world's population at the time. We know that because Mogens Herman Hansen has used modern methods for estimating the population of Greece using the walled area of cities and knowing that as a city state culture, most greeks lived in cities.

Classical Greece depended on imported grain and the heavy use of fertilizers to maintain their high population density. Their economy was very advanced, probably much more advanced than China and India at the time.

Polen data shows that agricultural production in the eastern mediterranean peaked in the period from 500 BCE to 200 BCE. So at the time of Alexander his part of the world was very densely populated. So the Persian Empire probably had a bigger proportion of the world population than suggested by the 18 million figure. Egypt alone had at least 5 million people and probably 7-8 million, not 3.5 million and the Persian Empire had probably 35 million people. About 25% of the world's population. Also, with a territory of 7-8 million square kilometers, a population of 18 million would be too small to allow a population density for this empire to effectively rule over their domain.

They probably didn't have 40%, much less the Sassanids, when agricultural production in the eastern mediterranean had dropped from classical times and they didn't control Egypt, Asia Minor and the Levant, which were the most densely populated areas of the old Persian Empire. The Sassanids probably had around 10 million inhabitants. They were only a shadow of the former Persian Empire.

The Roman Empire probably had 70 million people, but estimates vary from 60 million to well over 100 million. Considering that Greece achieved 9 million people, the whole Roman Empire could have acheived over 100 million. So they are a serious candidate for an empire with more than 40% of the world's population inside their borders.

In demographic terms the Roman Empire was much more densely populated than the Persian Empire.

The population is a great way to rate world empires, but check out the top 5 SUCCESSFUL world empires in history:

I doubt that Iran and Rome to have more people than China, even India - forever. The two may dominate the list of most of human history. In the East, for example, including hundreds of thousands of troops in combat, whereas the fighting in the West is relatively small, including the often less than men million, and fewer cases tens of thousands of men...

Originally posted by honeybee Although estimates of the past are sketchy at best, the source above estimate that in 400 BC, China had 27% of the world's population, India had 24%, while Europe had 18%, Persia did not have large parts of any of these regions, and these regions already made up 69% of the world's population. This is not even including large parts of Asia that are not under Persian control. So there is no way that Achaemenid had even close to 40%, in fact its hard to imagine that it could even have 30%.

Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Ok, according to your numbers that I assume to be based on an accurate census in the ancient times, not the analyzation of historical data, like tax and other things, it can be still said that the poplation of the Persian empire was more than 40 percent of the world, because the most populated parts of of three continents belonged to this empire, especially the Sindh region which was the centre of Indian civilization.