Population of Westeros

[Aldarion]

https://fantasyview.wordpress.com/2020/04/21/population-of-westeros/

Go to the link to see methodology. But to sum it up, I used two different methods for estimating population of various regions of Westeros. First, by using the "army is X% of the population" estimate, and second, by using population density from historical European kingdoms that kingdoms of Westeros are based on.

These are the results:

Quote

 

As it can be seen, estimates arrived at by comparison with army sizes usually result in rather underpopulated kingdoms. One way to fix this would be to assume that mobilization rates have been vastly overstated, which is a possibility as medieval mobilization rates may have varied from 0,5 to 2,5%.

North

population by army size: 1 475 000 – 2 458 000

population by density: 7 500 000 – 12 500 000

military: 29 500

mobilization at density: 0,2 – 0,4%

Riverlands:

population by army size: 1 000 000 – 1 700 000

population by density: 12 700 000 – 14 400 000

military: 20 000

mobilization at density: 0,14 – 0,16%

Westerlands

population by army size: 1 750 000 – 5 625 000

population by density: 5 000 000 – 6 900 000

military: 67 500

mobilization at density: 0,98 – 1,35%

Stormlands

population by army size: 1 250 000 – 2 083 000

population by density: 3 817 000 – 5 722 000

military: 25 000

mobilization at density: 0,44 – 0,65%

Reach

population by army size: 3 250 000 – 8 396 000

population by density: 34 267 000 – 41 607 000

military: 100 750

mobilization at density: 0,24 – 0,29%

Vale

population by army size: 1 250 000 – 2 083 000

population by density: 7 180 000 – 8 376 000

military: 25 000

mobilization at density: 0,30 – 0,35%

Dorne

population by army size: 1 250 000 – 2 083 000

population by density: 5 010 000 – 6 008 000

military: 25 000

mobilization at density: 0,42 – 0,50%

Iron Islands

population by army size: 420 000

population by density: 10 000 – 20 000

military: 42 000

mobilization at density: 210 – 420%

Crownlands

population by army size: 550 000 – 4 437 000

population by density: 1 952 000 – 2 672 000

military: 53 250

mobilization at density: 1,99 – 2,73%

Overall, all these ranges are possible with feudal system. But regardless how one calculates population, it is clear that mobilization rates are way too low to justify “conscripted peasants” trope assumed by some people – including, on occasion, the author (George Martin) himself. The only exception are the Iron Islands, which apparently have advanced “zombie soldier” recruitment model, allowing them to field several times as many soldiers as they realistically should be able to.

 

Which of the above estimates do you think is most likely?

[Ingelheim]

Dorne is the least populated of the Seven Kingdoms, said by Doran Martell himself in AFFC. So that would be wrong, as you put both the Iron Islands and the Stormnlands behind them.

I've always assumed Martin intended the Seven Kingdoms to have a similar population to the Roman Empire / High Middle Ages. At least that's what I gathered from the number of troops raised, pretty similar to the legions and auxiliaries (although larger than any army ever assembled in Europe during the Middle Ages).

I would assume:

-The North: between 6 and 10 million

-The Vale: between 6 and 10

-The Riverlands: between 4 and 8

-The Westerlands: between 10 and 15

-The Crownlands: between 2 and 4

-The Reach: between 15 and 25

-The Iron Islands: between 3 and 5

-The Stormlands: between 4 and 8

-Dorne: between 2 and 4

So, 50 to 85 million people, more or less. No way of knowing exactly, but those numbers seem about right

Edited November 16, 2023 by Ingelheim

[Lee-Sensei]

Just my guesses.

Crownlands: 1,500,000

Iron Islands: 2,000,000 (I'm iffy on this one)

Dorne: 2,500,000

Stormlands: 3,000,000

Riverlands: 4,500,000

North: 4,500,000

Vale: 4,500,000

Westerlands: 5,000,000

Reach: 10,000,000

Westeros: 37,000,000-38,000,000

Over twice the population of medieval France.

[SeanF]

Overall, the North is about 1.1 m square miles, and the South about 2.2 m.  

Linking population to army sizes is difficult.  While army sizes are mentioned at various stages, we don't have any real data for how many men each of the Seven Kingdoms is capable of fielding.  Also, there's a difference between how many men you can raise and equip for an expedition into neighbouring territory, and how many you can raise and equip for defence of their home territory. 

I think one should assume that every adult male of fighting age (here meaning males aged 12-40), is liable for conscription.  But, only a small minority of such males would in practice be conscripted.  In a society whose standard of living probably never exceeds twice subsistence, on a per capita basis, the large majority of adult males are needed to tend the fields and gather in the harvest.

By way of comparison, in the closing stages of the Napoleonic wars, c.10% of adult males in the UK were in the army, navy, or militia.  A similar proportion of Spanish were in the army, or partidas.  In France, the only country of the three that had a rigorous conscription, around 15% (but that was met in turn by huge levels of desertion). But, those were three countries that at the end of 20 years of war, were straining every sinew to put men into the field, were much better organised for war than any of the Seven Kingdoms, and certainly were wealthier (and in the case of the UK, in the earliest stages of the industrial revolution).  Spain was severely hit by famine, as the poorest country of the three, and much of it under foreign occupation.

I would guess that in a place like the Seven Kingdoms, having more than 3-4% of adult males away fighting would cause widespread famine.  It wouldn't take much of a fall in food production, even if just at local level, to send prices soaring.  Famine is certainly referred to (accurately) in the books, both as a result of pillage, and as a result of young men going away to war (most lords will disproportionately conscript those men who are nearest the muster point, rather than look to recruit evenly across their domains. So, in areas of heavy recruitment, food production will drop sharply).

Overall army sizes will also be limited by the ability to forage, in any given locality.  We're given numbers of 100,000 for Renly's army, 35,000 for the number who invade the Reach, and 20,000 for the number that Robb leads South.  As those are all expeditionary forces, rather than forces that are defending the homeland, we should assume that they all a very small proportion of the number of adult males in their respective territories. We do hear of additional forces that are recruited to confront Robb's chevauchee in the West,  and men held back by Lord Manderly, and the Mountain Clans.

Overall, I'd find it hard to believe that the population density of the Seven Kingdoms, South of the Neck, would be lower than that of England at the time of Domesday Book.  That would be 30 people per square mile.  Much of the land is very fertile.  We're led to believe that the North is far more sparsely populated.  In fact, it's probably more sparsely populated than Scotland in 1086 (c.10 per square mile). That said, if the North can send 20,000 South, and keep thousands more in reserve, we must assume that it's population runs well into the millions.  At, say, five people per square mile, the North would have a population of 5.5 million.  But, if it is Scotland, then more like 11 million.

So, the South could have a population of c.60 million, the North 5.5 - 11 million.

Within the South, I'd expect Dorne to be relatively sparsley populated, as it's mostly desert, with the highest population density in the Reach.

So, perhaps 20 million for the Reach, (40 per square mile) perhaps 4 million for Dorne (ten per square mile). The Riverlands should be well-populated, being so fertile, perhaps 10 million (40 per square mile). Kings Landing and the Crownlands should have the highest population density of all, comprising the capital, surrounding towns and villages, and being on the main trade routes.  Perhaps 6 million (50 per square mile). That would leave 20 million, divided between the Westerlands, Stormlands, and the Vale.

 

Edited November 17, 2023 by SeanF

[Aldarion]

16 hours ago, SeanF said:

Overall, the North is about 1.1 m square miles, and the South about 2.2 m.  

Linking population to army sizes is difficult.  While army sizes are mentioned at various stages, we don't have any real data for how many men each of the Seven Kingdoms is capable of fielding.  Also, there's a difference between how many men you can raise and equip for an expedition into neighbouring territory, and how many you can raise and equip for defence of their home territory. 

I think one should assume that every adult male of fighting age (here meaning males aged 12-40), is liable for conscription.  But, only a small minority of such males would in practice be conscripted.  In a society whose standard of living probably never exceeds twice subsistence, on a per capita basis, the large majority of adult males are needed to tend the fields and gather in the harvest.

By way of comparison, in the closing stages of the Napoleonic wars, c.10% of adult males in the UK were in the army, navy, or militia.  A similar proportion of Spanish were in the army, or partidas.  In France, the only country of the three that had a rigorous conscription, around 15% (but that was met in turn by huge levels of desertion). But, those were three countries that at the end of 20 years of war, were straining every sinew to put men into the field, were much better organised for war than any of the Seven Kingdoms, and certainly were wealthier (and in the case of the UK, in the earliest stages of the industrial revolution).  Spain was severely hit by famine, as the poorest country of the three, and much of it under foreign occupation.

I would guess that in a place like the Seven Kingdoms, having more than 3-4% of adult males away fighting would cause widespread famine.  It wouldn't take much of a fall in food production, even if just at local level, to send prices soaring.  Famine is certainly referred to (accurately) in the books, both as a result of pillage, and as a result of young men going away to war (most lords will disproportionately conscript those men who are nearest the muster point, rather than look to recruit evenly across their domains. So, in areas of heavy recruitment, food production will drop sharply).

Overall army sizes will also be limited by the ability to forage, in any given locality.  We're given numbers of 100,000 for Renly's army, 35,000 for the number who invade the Reach, and 20,000 for the number that Robb leads South.  As those are all expeditionary forces, rather than forces that are defending the homeland, we should assume that they all a very small proportion of the number of adult males in their respective territories. We do hear of additional forces that are recruited to confront Robb's chevauchee in the West,  and men held back by Lord Manderly, and the Mountain Clans.

Overall, I'd find it hard to believe that the population density of the Seven Kingdoms, South of the Neck, would be lower than that of England at the time of Domesday Book.  That would be 30 people per square mile.  Much of the land is very fertile.  We're led to believe that the North is far more sparsely populated.  In fact, it's probably more sparsely populated than Scotland in 1086 (c.10 per square mile). That said, if the North can send 20,000 South, and keep thousands more in reserve, we must assume that it's population runs well into the millions.  At, say, five people per square mile, the North would have a population of 5.5 million.  But, if it is Scotland, then more like 11 million.

So, the South could have a population of c.60 million, the North 5.5 - 11 million.

Within the South, I'd expect Dorne to be relatively sparsley populated, as it's mostly desert, with the highest population density in the Reach.

So, perhaps 20 million for the Reach, (40 per square mile) perhaps 4 million for Dorne (ten per square mile). The Riverlands should be well-populated, being so fertile, perhaps 10 million (40 per square mile). Kings Landing and the Crownlands should have the highest population density of all, comprising the capital, surrounding towns and villages, and being on the main trade routes.  Perhaps 6 million (50 per square mile). That would leave 20 million, divided between the Westerlands, Stormlands, and the Vale.

 

All I can say is, makes sense. Thanks!

[Ingelheim]

21 hours ago, SeanF said:

Overall, the North is about 1.1 m square miles, and the South about 2.2 m.  

Linking population to army sizes is difficult.  While army sizes are mentioned at various stages, we don't have any real data for how many men each of the Seven Kingdoms is capable of fielding.  Also, there's a difference between how many men you can raise and equip for an expedition into neighbouring territory, and how many you can raise and equip for defence of their home territory. 

I think one should assume that every adult male of fighting age (here meaning males aged 12-40), is liable for conscription.  But, only a small minority of such males would in practice be conscripted.  In a society whose standard of living probably never exceeds twice subsistence, on a per capita basis, the large majority of adult males are needed to tend the fields and gather in the harvest.

By way of comparison, in the closing stages of the Napoleonic wars, c.10% of adult males in the UK were in the army, navy, or militia.  A similar proportion of Spanish were in the army, or partidas.  In France, the only country of the three that had a rigorous conscription, around 15% (but that was met in turn by huge levels of desertion). But, those were three countries that at the end of 20 years of war, were straining every sinew to put men into the field, were much better organised for war than any of the Seven Kingdoms, and certainly were wealthier (and in the case of the UK, in the earliest stages of the industrial revolution).  Spain was severely hit by famine, as the poorest country of the three, and much of it under foreign occupation.

I would guess that in a place like the Seven Kingdoms, having more than 3-4% of adult males away fighting would cause widespread famine.  It wouldn't take much of a fall in food production, even if just at local level, to send prices soaring.  Famine is certainly referred to (accurately) in the books, both as a result of pillage, and as a result of young men going away to war (most lords will disproportionately conscript those men who are nearest the muster point, rather than look to recruit evenly across their domains. So, in areas of heavy recruitment, food production will drop sharply).

Overall army sizes will also be limited by the ability to forage, in any given locality.  We're given numbers of 100,000 for Renly's army, 35,000 for the number who invade the Reach, and 20,000 for the number that Robb leads South.  As those are all expeditionary forces, rather than forces that are defending the homeland, we should assume that they all a very small proportion of the number of adult males in their respective territories. We do hear of additional forces that are recruited to confront Robb's chevauchee in the West,  and men held back by Lord Manderly, and the Mountain Clans.

Overall, I'd find it hard to believe that the population density of the Seven Kingdoms, South of the Neck, would be lower than that of England at the time of Domesday Book.  That would be 30 people per square mile.  Much of the land is very fertile.  We're led to believe that the North is far more sparsely populated.  In fact, it's probably more sparsely populated than Scotland in 1086 (c.10 per square mile). That said, if the North can send 20,000 South, and keep thousands more in reserve, we must assume that it's population runs well into the millions.  At, say, five people per square mile, the North would have a population of 5.5 million.  But, if it is Scotland, then more like 11 million.

So, the South could have a population of c.60 million, the North 5.5 - 11 million.

Within the South, I'd expect Dorne to be relatively sparsley populated, as it's mostly desert, with the highest population density in the Reach.

So, perhaps 20 million for the Reach, (40 per square mile) perhaps 4 million for Dorne (ten per square mile). The Riverlands should be well-populated, being so fertile, perhaps 10 million (40 per square mile). Kings Landing and the Crownlands should have the highest population density of all, comprising the capital, surrounding towns and villages, and being on the main trade routes.  Perhaps 6 million (50 per square mile). That would leave 20 million, divided between the Westerlands, Stormlands, and the Vale.

 

I would say the Westerlands probably has a similar population to the Vale and Stormlands combined. So probably like 4-8 stormlanders, 6-10 men from the Vale, and 10-15 men from the Westerlands.

 

[Alden Rothack]

On 11/16/2023 at 8:11 PM, Ingelheim said:

Dorne is the least populated of the Seven Kingdoms, said by Doran Martell himself in AFFC. So that would be wrong, as you put both the Iron Islands and the Stormnlands behind them.

Dorne is the least populous not necessarily the least populated, the Iron Islands certainly have fewer and the Stormlands would need double the population density to break even, this is quite possible but it pushes the population density of more fertile kingdoms still higher

 

On 11/17/2023 at 1:57 AM, Lee-Sensei said:

Iron Islands: 2,000,000 (I'm iffy on this one)

one million would make them the most populous kingdom

 

On 11/17/2023 at 1:57 AM, Lee-Sensei said:

Over twice the population of medieval France.

which was a third the size of the reach alone

 

On 11/17/2023 at 6:49 AM, SeanF said:

But, if it is Scotland, then more like 11 million.

the North is 40 times the size of Scotland and debatedly even as sparse as Early Medieval Scotlands 30 people per mile

 

16 hours ago, Ingelheim said:

I would say the Westerlands probably has a similar population to the Vale and Stormlands combined. So probably like 4-8 stormlanders, 6-10 men from the Vale, and 10-15 men from the Westerlands.

 

that seems like since there isn't a huge size difference

[Ingelheim]

10 minutes ago, Alden Rothack said:

Dorne is the least populous not necessarily the least populated, the Iron Islands certainly have fewer and the Stormlands would need double the population density to break even, this is quite possible but it pushes the population density of more fertile kingdoms still higher

Dorne is a desert almost the size of Spain, my own country. I would say there's a good chance it's both the least populous and the least populated.

Edited November 18, 2023 by Ingelheim

[Alden Rothack]

1 minute ago, Ingelheim said:

Dorne is a desert almost the size of Spain, my own country. I would say there's a good chance it's both the least populous and the least populated.

its nearly twice the size of the Stormlands, triple the Crownlands and thirty two times the size of the Iron Islands, there is no chance the Ironborn have more people

[Lee-Sensei]

16 hours ago, Alden Rothack said:

its nearly twice the size of the Stormlands, triple the Crownlands and thirty two times the size of the Iron Islands, there is no chance the Ironborn have more people

Where did you get those ratios?

 

[Alden Rothack]

1 minute ago, Lee-Sensei said:

Where did you get those ratios?

 

https://atlasoficeandfireblog.wordpress.com/2020/03/28/the-size-of-westeros-revisited/

I was slightly off, its actually thirty times not thirty two but the point stands

theres no way the iron islands have a total population higher than Dorne, Flanders with multiple huge cities and the most productive farm land in the world at the end managed about three times the population density of Spain.

the iron islands need to be bigger, more fertile or preferably both to have even million people

[Ran]

The Iron Islands are not, alone, considered to be one of the canonical seven kingdoms. This is why the cup presented to Joffrey does not feature the Greyjoy sigil, and he makes a mean jest about it.

So when Doran says it's the least populous of the Seven Kingdoms, if he considers the Iron Islands at all it's as part of the former Kingdom of the Isles and the Rivers, so it's population plus that of the riverlands.