The Seven Kingdoms Least to Most Populous

[Alden Rothack]

The least populous of the Seven Kingdoms is directly stated to be Dorne though the Iron Islands, and Crownlands both have fewer people in absolute terms and the Stormlands have the same number but in less than two thirds of the area.

The North being more populous than Dorne makes sense, its good enough land that people live on all of it for most of its history whereas Dorne is mostly empty.

The Stormlands aren't described as very good land but unlike Dorne or the Vale most of it is properly inhabitted

The Vale of Arryn is probably as densily populated as the Reach or the peacetime Riverlands but its offset by the Mountains taking up most of the Kingdom of Mountain and Vale resulting in an overall density only slightly higher than the Stormlands

Riverlands and the Reach are very similiarly fertile across all their lands however poor management and frequent wars give the edge to the Reach on population density.

 

 

 

[Floki of the Ironborn]

From least to most:

Crownlands

Iron Islands

Dorne

Stormlands

North

Vale

Riverlands

Westerlands

Reach

[James Arryn]

Ran did a video on this years back, from which the AtlasoIaF quoted these numbers for armies:

• 15,000 for the Crownlands.
• 35-40,000 for the North.
• 35-40,000 for the Riverlands.
• 35-40,000 for the Vale of Arryn.
• 50-55,000 for the Westerlands.
• 15,000 for the Iron Islands.
• 20,000-25,000 for the Stormlands.
• 25-30,000 for Dorne.
• 120,000 for the Reach.

and these for populations:

 

• 1.5 million for the Crownlands.
• 4 million for the North.
• 4 million for the Riverlands.
• 4 million for the Vale of Arryn.
• 5.5 million for the Westerlands.
• 1.5 million for the Iron Islands.
• 2.5 million for the Stormlands
• 3 million for Dorne
• 12 million for the Reach.

 

 

https://atlasoficeandfireblog.wordpress.com/2016/03/06/the-population-of-the-seven-kingdoms/

 

 

[Alden Rothack]

9 minutes ago, Floki of the Ironborn said:

From least to most:

Crownlands

Iron Islands

Dorne

Stormlands

North

Vale

Riverlands

Westerlands

Reach

Populous not populated

Dorne has the lowest population density not the lowest population in absolute terms

[Alden Rothack]

1 minute ago, James Arryn said:

Ran did a video on this years back, from which the AtlasoIaF quoted these numbers for armies:

• 15,000 for the Crownlands.
• 35-40,000 for the North.
• 35-40,000 for the Riverlands.
• 35-40,000 for the Vale of Arryn.
• 50-55,000 for the Westerlands.
• 15,000 for the Iron Islands.
• 20,000-25,000 for the Stormlands.
• 25-30,000 for Dorne.
• 120,000 for the Reach.

The Armies are for the most part directly from the books and are as far as I can tell accurate for land based forces

1 minute ago, James Arryn said:

and these for populations:

 

• 1.5 million for the Crownlands.
• 4 million for the North.
• 4 million for the Riverlands.
• 4 million for the Vale of Arryn.
• 5.5 million for the Westerlands.
• 1.5 million for the Iron Islands.
• 2.5 million for the Stormlands
• 3 million for Dorne
• 12 million for the Reach.

 

 

https://atlasoficeandfireblog.wordpress.com/2016/03/06/the-population-of-the-seven-kingdoms/

 

 

 

the Iron Islands cannot possibly have that many on their tiny islands, the Crownlands is twelve times the size hell the Gift alone is nearly three times the size of the Islands combined.

As for the rest we are specifically told that Dorne is the least densily populated of the kingdoms followed logically by the North, it isn't the least in absolute terms even on Rans list which is one of the parts I do agree with.

Furthermore we are told that the Reach has both of the highest and densest population and in Rans figures that isn't the case either, Ran has the Westerlands as the most populous

[James Arryn]

8 minutes ago, Alden Rothack said:

The Armies are for the most part directly from the books and are as far as I can tell accurate for land based forces

 

the Iron Islands cannot possibly have that many on their tiny islands, the Crownlands is twelve times the size hell the Gift alone is nearly three times the size of the Islands combined.

As for the rest we are specifically told that Dorne is the least densily populated of the kingdoms followed logically by the North, it isn't the least in absolute terms even on Rans list which is one of the parts I do agree with.

Furthermore we are told that the Reach has both of the highest and densest population and in Rans figures that isn't the case either, Ran has the Westerlands as the most populous

It has the Reach at 12 million. 

[Craving Peaches]

Yeah there's no way the Iron Islands could have that many people. They just can't support them. The islands are tiny compared to all the other kingdoms, the land is poor, and they disavow farming.

[Takiedevushkikakzvezdy]

4 minutes ago, Craving Peaches said:

Yeah there's no way the Iron Islands could have that many people.

Plus, I was under the impression that they are typically not counted as one of the 7 Kingdoms.

[Craving Peaches]

10 minutes ago, Takiedevushkikakzvezdy said:

Plus, I was under the impression that they are typically not counted as one of the 7 Kingdoms.

Yeah, I don't think the Crownlands count as a kingdom either...

[Alden Rothack]

2 minutes ago, Craving Peaches said:

Yeah, I don't think the Crownlands count as a kingdom either...

I think its the Riverlands that doesn't count as one of the Seven, Aegon was already king of Dragonstone

 

 

[Takiedevushkikakzvezdy]

1 minute ago, Alden Rothack said:

I think its the Riverlands that doesn't count as one of the Seven

Oh, the Iron Isles and the Riverlands were one kingdom initially.

[Alden Rothack]

26 minutes ago, James Arryn said:

It has the Reach at 12 million. 

I know I can read

However the Reach cannot have only 12 million and be the most populous of the kingdoms which is what we are told is the case, additionally the Riverlands is often quoted as the second most populous whereas that list has the Westerlands as the most populous despite the books saying its third at best.

[Alden Rothack]

2 minutes ago, Takiedevushkikakzvezdy said:

Oh, the Iron Isles and the Riverlands were one kingdom initially.

Yes and that kingdom would still have been the second most populous

[Werthead]

Yeah, I think the determination that the Iron Islands has 1.5 million is unsustainable (and I'm the one who published it!). It must be significantly less than that, although that has all kinds of problems.

I think it stems from the issue that the worldbuilding for the Iron Islands is not as robust as it could be in the books. 

1 minute ago, Alden Rothack said:

I know I can read

However the Reach cannot have only 12 million and be the most populous of the kingdoms which is what we are told is the case, additionally the Riverlands is often quoted as the second most populous whereas that list has the Westerlands as the most populous despite the books saying its third at best.

The Westerlands has 5 million.

The Reach has 12 million.

Not sure why you think it's saying that the Westerlands is more populous.

[James Arryn]

5 minutes ago, Alden Rothack said:

I know I can read

However the Reach cannot have only 12 million and be the most populous of the kingdoms which is what we are told is the case, additionally the Riverlands is often quoted as the second most populous whereas that list has the Westerlands as the most populous despite the books saying its third at best.

I’m…one of us isn’t seeing what the other is. It says Reach 12 million, Westerlands 5.5. What am I missing?

 

As for the RL, remember that no ~ charters for cities were issued for the RL, which is a major factor for population centres. 

[Werthead]

Oh, population density. The Westerlands would be ~28 per square mile, the Reach ~25 per square mile.

I don't recall George saying anywhere that the Reach would be the most densely populated region. It's absolutely huge, if it was the most densely population region its overall population would be insane, and the Reach would be able to field armies even bigger than the ones we hear about already.

It might be plausible though. The Reach is based on medieval France and is almost twice the size, but medieval France in c. 1300 had around 17 million people, so the Reach could have a much larger population. But the evidence for that is thin.

[Takiedevushkikakzvezdy]

5 minutes ago, Alden Rothack said:

Yes and that kingdom would still have been the second most populous

But not the Iron Islands in isolation.

[James Arryn]

4 minutes ago, Werthead said:

Oh, population density. The Westerlands would be ~28 per square mile, the Reach ~25 per square mile.

I don't recall George saying anywhere that the Reach would be the most densely populated region. It's absolutely huge, if it was the most densely population region its overall population would be insane, and the Reach would be able to field armies even bigger than the ones we hear about already.

It might be plausible though. The Reach is based on medieval France and is almost twice the size, but medieval France in c. 1300 had around 17 million people, so the Reach could have a much larger population. But the evidence for that is thin.

Oh, density, okay. Yeah, it could go many ways. Only certainties are North should be least dense by a significant margin, then I suppose Dorne. Otoh you’d think the Crownlands might be the densest. 

[Takiedevushkikakzvezdy]

11 minutes ago, Werthead said:

I think it stems from the issue that the worldbuilding for the Iron Islands is not as robust as it could be in the books.

Has GRRM ever commented on whether or not the Iron Islands have any forestation and how they build their ships?

[Alden Rothack]

1 minute ago, Takiedevushkikakzvezdy said:

3 minutes ago, Werthead said:

Oh, population density. The Westerlands would be ~28 per square mile, the Reach ~25 per square mile.

I don't recall George saying anywhere that the Reach would be the most densely populated region. It's absolutely huge, if it was the most densely population region its overall population would be insane, and the Reach would be able to field armies even bigger than the ones we hear about already.

It might be plausible though. The Reach is based on medieval France and is almost twice the size, but medieval France in c. 1300 had around 17 million people, so the Reach could have a much larger population. But the evidence for that is thin.

the reach is noted as the most fertile of the kingdoms and therefore it should have a moderate edge over the Riverlands, the Westerlands should be third, its very mountainous but unlike the Vale people do live across just about all of it in fairly large numbers.

Dorne is the only other certainty, its stated as the least populous in the text and most of it is empty whereas the North has large populations as far north as Skagos and Bear Island I see no reason that this wouldn't be true.