Despite being a island nation with little arable land and full of mountains it was able to produce a stable population of about 30 million through out the Edo period (1603-1868) so how was it able to do that when France with a larger agriculture base only reached 30 million by the early 1800s. And even today it has a very large population for its geography.
Why was Japan able to yield a large population.
- Thread starter Ameck16
- Start date
My understanding is the leaders were careful not to disrupt agriculture when they campaigned. farm districts were not depopulated, crops not despoiled as often, livestock not killed as often.
Also after Japan was 'opened' it became a rice importer, making up any shortages with purchases from Korea, & elsewhere.
Also after Japan was 'opened' it became a rice importer, making up any shortages with purchases from Korea, & elsewhere.
France had a population of about 22 million before the black death if I am not mistaken, but the black death combined with the Protestant reformation stopped it from ever going about that figure until the mid-1700s. I think it could have easily had a population of 40-50 million in 1800 without those catastrophes, which Japan never faced.
Edit: This wikipedia article has the historic population figures, see how it lingers around 18,000,000 for several centuries from the Black Death through to the end of the Wars of Religion. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_France#Historical_population_of_metropolitan_France
Edit: This wikipedia article has the historic population figures, see how it lingers around 18,000,000 for several centuries from the Black Death through to the end of the Wars of Religion. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_France#Historical_population_of_metropolitan_France
TFSmith121
Banned
No land frontiers
There's a reason Britain was (generally) pretty free from external threats in the period; same for Japan.
Contrast with France, which really only has formidable natural frontiers to the southeast and southwest, or the German states, or Poland, or Ukraine... Or the various Central Asian states, China in different periods, etc.
And maritime frontiers have a tendency to prevent the worst of epidemics, animal diseases, agricultural blights, etc. from spreading...
There's a reason the Channel is Europe's greatest natural anti-tank obstacle.
Best,
There's a reason Britain was (generally) pretty free from external threats in the period; same for Japan.
Contrast with France, which really only has formidable natural frontiers to the southeast and southwest, or the German states, or Poland, or Ukraine... Or the various Central Asian states, China in different periods, etc.
And maritime frontiers have a tendency to prevent the worst of epidemics, animal diseases, agricultural blights, etc. from spreading...
There's a reason the Channel is Europe's greatest natural anti-tank obstacle.
Best,
Adding on to this, Japan never experienced a foreign invasion throughout its history, enabling continuous population growth, while France experienced major conflicts (and severe internal turmoil) for over a millennia before the 19th century, significantly devastating farmland and draining resources, as well as limiting carrying capacity for three centuries.
Comparing Japan with Korea (both of which had extremely rugged terrain):
Early-mid 13th century
Korea: 10-12 million
Japan: 6-8 million
Early 17th century
Korea: 6-8 million (after invasions from the Mongols, Japanese, and Jurchen/Manchu, along with wokou raids; low of 4-6 million in late 13th century)
Japan: 15-20 million
18th-19th centuries (Cash crops were introduced from the 16th-19th centuries, leading to improved farming practices)
Korea: 10-15 million
Japan: 25-30 million
In other words, had 2-3 major invasions been launched from or through Korea into Japan, the latter's population would probably have been limited to 10-20 million at the time.
This too.
Yup. France was one of the richest Kingdoms in terms of natural resources. It could easily make up for crop failure with surplus from other provinces. France was stymied by warfare, and bad government.
England didn't have problems with either, which is why they surpassed France. Geography can really make or break it.
But didn´t the population correct itself before the industrial era? I don´t think that the German population would be twice as big than OTL without 30 Years war.
But I guess there is a limit of population that Metropolitan France can support without importing food, anyway England faced religious persecution too. The real problem was the low population growth of France during the last 2 century.
Well Japan´s population grew with agricultural innovation, so I guess that without food importation the population can grow only until the carrying capacity of the land was reached. Korea was a food exporter, so why didn´t the population simply replenish itself? And France exported or imported of food before the 19th century?
In time yes, but the gist is that France could have been even more prosperous and populous if it benefited from the geographic advantages Japan has as an island nation. Lack of warfare can even overcome other advantages such as France's agriculture.
The population did replenish itself, although at a relatively slow rate. Reread what I wrote earlier.
Specifically, the Mongol invasions (1231-57/9, and an uprising from 1270-3) severely reduced Korea's population from 10-12 million to 4-6 million, suggesting that up to 2/3 of the populace may have effectively been wiped out, while up to a million were either transferred or immigrated to Manchuria (including Liaodong) in the following decades. Any population increases until the mid-14th century were negated by the late century due to severe wokou raids, the Red Turban Rebellion (which temporarily captured Gaegyeong, the capital), an invasion backed by the Yuan, and a temporary push into Liaodong to directly incorporate its Korean population, all of which severely displaced the populace.
After a coup ended Goryeo and founded Joseon in 1392, the population gradually increased from 6 to 8 million from the early 15th to late 16th centuries, although growth was again limited by frequent wokou raids across the coastline, in which 841 recorded incidents occurred from the late 14th to mid-16th centuries. The Imjin War (1592-8) and the two Jurchen/Manchu invasions (1627, 1636-7) then reduced the population by 1-2 million, while over 600,000 slaves were sold in Liaodong in 1637 after terminating hostilities.
As a result, it was not until the mid-17th century that the peninsular population growth began again in earnest due to cash crops, after which the figures swelled from around 6 to 15 million (some sources suggest up to 18 million) up to the late 19th century, essentially tripling in size. Hence why I had stated that population trends for Japan would have more closely resembled that for Korea had the former been invaded two or three times, potentially resulting in figures around 10-20 million during the 15th to 19th centuries.
I'm also unsure about what you mean by Korea's status as a "food exporter," as it essentially remained as a net importer for centuries due to China and Japan's larger populations and amounts of arable land, not to mention that the peninsula's cash crops through the Columbian Exchange were also imported directly from both neighbors. While Japan was diplomatically treated as a tributary by Korea in the aftermath of the Imjin War, the former continued to sustain higher volumes of trade since the 15th century.
If you looked at the link I put, the population seems to plummet due to a different crisis everytime it manages to get back up to its former size.
Sure, there's a limit to how large a population France can support - there's a limit to how big a population anywhere can support, after all. But without all the disease, war and internal issues France faced, it'd almost definitely have had a larger population.
The same can be said for Germany - today, Germany has a population exceeding 80 million - in 1700 it had around 19 million, 1834 it had 23 million, in 1900 56 million. Without the wars and diseases it faced through history, it wouldn't be unfair to estimate that Germany could have reached a population of 40 million by 1800.
elkarlo
Banned
This. Rice per acre yileds more calories than wheats. So it inherently leads to the ability to maintain a higher pop density. This is seen all over east Asia. The rainyer weather here helps support the rice culture
England had religious persecution, but not 40 years of religious civil war like France did. And then over an 80-year stretch (1635-1715), France was very regularly at war, often fighting huge battles against various coalitions which led to major casualties. England was often at war then too, but didn't do as much actual fighting.
But you are correct that it was France's curiously low population growth in the 19th century that allowed Britain to fully catch up.