Any place as capable of supporting large population as india or china?

When all other factors are removed, are there any other places on earth capable of supporting the immense populations of the indian subcontinent and china, both in ancient and modern times? I don't know enough about agriculture to assume anything, but maybe the interior plains of america or the black earth belt?
 
Nowhere else really, maybe Europe(if you eliminate Northern Russia and Scandinavia you have similar sizes compared to those other 2 regions), this is for population levels close to those 2 regions, if you want even half of that then more options open up.

Although Europe for ancient times wouldn't exactly work.
 

Lusitania

Donor
I read that the only reason that both India and China were able to support such large concentrations of people in tropical areas was their diet. With drinking tea which required them to boil water being a huge component in keeping disease under control.

Where aseurope answer to drinking contaminated water was to avoid drinking water and drink alcohol instead.

Anyone else come across this?
 
The modern day U.S. could have had the natives been immune to old world diseases and had old world crops and animals. The Mississippi could have very well been the American Ganges or Yangtze.
 
The modern day U.S. could have had the natives been immune to old world diseases and had old world crops and animals. The Mississippi could have very well been the American Ganges or Yangtze.
If you can get the potato to migrate north, you have one of the most productive cereal crop that would do wonders for nutrition
 

Lusitania

Donor
The modern day U.S. could have had the natives been immune to old world diseases and had old world crops and animals. The Mississippi could have very well been the American Ganges or Yangtze.
As per another thread recently the only way natives Americans can be resistance to old world diseases would of required continuous exposure to Europeans or Asians plus the native lack of animal husbandry also limited native American exposure and immunization. One time contact will not do the trick.
 
Indonesian archipelago maybe? Between rice cultivation and fishing you could get a lot of food...

Already does so. Half the worlds population lives within Indonesia, China and India. Indonesia is a biiiig part of that.

I think a surviving Roman Empire certainly could match it. Take Germany, Italy, and the UK - today they have some of the highest population densities in the world, which could well lead it to having the massive populations of India, China and Indonesia, especially if you had more security in place like the incredibly population-dense Lebanon.

One factor in its favour is that population densities tend to increase on the coast and near rivers, features that Europe and the Med have in abundance. Introduce farming techniques earlier, and you could see similar populations in Europe.
 
If you can get the potato to migrate north, you have one of the most productive cereal crop that would do wonders for nutrition

They already had a lot of nice crops (Eastern Agricultural Complex), the problem is they didn't develop them enough and abandoned them in favour of the simpler Mesoamerican plants. A healthy, developed EAC would be incredible for North American Indians and yes, would leave the Mississippi Valley and it's tributaries as some equivalent to Northern India, with the East Coast as a periphery and the Rockies/Great Basin/West Coast as a barbarous hinterland, although perhaps in time it might spread to parts of California or especially the Pacific Northwest.

Unfortunately, they don't have any domesticates bigger than a dog, and the best candidates, the caribou and moose, are too far north. But given a domesticated white-tailed deer or even a surviving species of American horse or camel...
 
When all other factors are removed, are there any other places on earth capable of supporting the immense populations of the indian subcontinent and china, both in ancient and modern times? I don't know enough about agriculture to assume anything, but maybe the interior plains of america or the black earth belt?
Well América formones you have a enormous basin capable of support a big population in the Eastern-Bolivia,Paraguay, southern Brasil, Uruguay, Argentina región, after all those land áre one of the most Food productivo regions, Argentina Alone produce enough Food to sustain 400 million Alone, and that With a Lot less intensive use of the land than China and The asian south east.
The USA could do also
México and Mesoamérica histórically, until The Spanish, Maintained a enormous population.
 
Europe + Mediterranean area could match it easily. The problem OTL was the disparity of agricultural technology as well as political divisions that constantly reduced populations due to wars. But all things being equal, Europe+Mediterranean has more agricultural potential than China proper. The Roman Empire had a greater pop than Han China despite having worse agricultural tech. The Indian subcontinent is about equivalent I believe.
 

Vuu

Banned
Europe, South America, North America. Asia is one of the lesser suited ones - in Europe all you have to do is do something that completely and permanently eviscerates EVERY single external invader, and have one country take east Europe, then centralize China-style. South America is maybe the most suited - Amazonians had terra preta, and the rest, except the altiplano, the atacama and atlantic patagonia is neat land

Barring Oceania and Antarctica, pretty much all of them can, but at what cost? China and India will become toxic soon
 
I read that the only reason that both India and China were able to support such large concentrations of people in tropical areas was their diet. With drinking tea which required them to boil water being a huge component in keeping disease under control.

Where aseurope answer to drinking contaminated water was to avoid drinking water and drink alcohol instead.

Anyone else come across this?

I've heard that it was because Asians ate rice instead of wheat. Rice can be cultivated in larger amounts per square meter.
 
Already does so. Half the worlds population lives within Indonesia, China and India. Indonesia is a biiiig part of that.

Indonesia's population (about 260 millions) actually is not that huge for the amount of land it has. Its density is about 135 per km2, compared to almost 400 per km2 in India, over 300 per km2 in the Philippines and 275 in Vietnam.

That said, the island of Java is extremely crowded.
 

Vuu

Banned
Yup, most of Indonesia is due to Java, and Java due to Jakarta. Generally you can't stuff many people into equatorial and tropic climates - frequent rains drain the soil of nutrients, one of the reasons the Amazon is being cut up today, as you need big fields to be productive. Putting coal and bones into the soil prevents this (terra preta)
 
As per another thread recently the only way natives Americans can be resistance to old world diseases would of required continuous exposure to Europeans or Asians plus the native lack of animal husbandry also limited native American exposure and immunization. One time contact will not do the trick.

A lengthy or permanent Norse presence in Newfoundland and beyond could do the trick. They have the domesticates, the diseases, and a willingness to trade without much infrastructure.
 

Lusitania

Donor
If you can get the potato to migrate north, you have one of the most productive cereal crop that would do wonders for nutrition
Potatoes while
A lengthy or permanent Norse presence in Newfoundland and beyond could do the trick. They have the domesticates, the diseases, and a willingness to trade without much infrastructure.
Yes as long as the Norse settlement continues to have contact with norse population in Iceland and Norway. If they loose contact then they loose imunibility for anything that appears in Europe after last contact. Also contact would need to extend down to Aztec and Inca plus other areas for them to receive immunization.
 
Top