Talk:List of countries by population in 1600

Ming Imperial Seal
The Ming Imperial Seal is used for the Ming. I believe that any symbol representing the state or authority can be used, whether or not it is a flag. This is also true for the Mughal Empire, or the Roman (on other pages). As for the veracity of the symbol itself, there is a discussion on the Ming dynasty talk page (to which I contributed), but no sources beyond paintings have been verified. Thought? Jlr3001 (talk) 19:07, 18 June 2018 (UTC)


 * If you had read the file description for the image like I mentioned in the edit summary of the other page, you will see the file description makes it clear this is a pattern sewn into the Wanli Emperor's robe, and the file name is erroneous. This is not an imperial seal of the Ming dynasty and does not represent the state. _dk (talk) 19:27, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I totally missed that. Thank you for the update.Jlr3001 (talk) 14:53, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Statistics Needed
The following countries existed in 1600. If you find statistics (and sources!) for them, please add them to the list and remove them from this one: Jlr3001 (talk) 20:46, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Vijayanagara Empire
 * Republic of Venice
 * Arakan
 * Taungoo Empire
 * Duchy of Prussia
 * Khanate of Khiva
 * Funj
 * Ryukyu Kingdom
 * Crimean Khanate
 * Principality of Moldavia
 * Papal States
 * Republic of Ragusa
 * Duchy of Parma
 * Duchy of Savoy
 * Republic of Genoa
 * Grand Duchy of Tuscany
 * Duchy of Urbino
 * Republic of Lucca
 * Duchy of Mantua
 * Kingdom of Kozhikode
 * Duchy of Mirandola
 * Duchy of Modena and Reggio
 * dynasty
 * Qutb Shahi dynasty
 * Garhwal Kingdom
 * Thanjavur Nayak kingdom
 * Kingdom of Middag
 * Most Serene Republic of San Marino
 * Deccan Sultanates
 * Shirvan
 * Qasim Khanate
 * Khanate of Bukhara
 * Pashalik of Timbuktu
 * Dendi Kingdom
 * Kingdom of Kartli
 * Kingdom of Imereti
 * Samtskhe-Saatabago
 * Kingdom of Kakheti
 * Aceh Sultanate
 * Sultanate of Sulu
 * Kaabu
 * Ahmadnagar Sultanate
 * Empire of Great Fulo
 * Ahom kingdom
 * Venad
 * Avar Khanate
 * Alodia
 * Kingdom of Arakan
 * Bonoman
 * Denkyira
 * Johor Sultanate
 * Golden Horde
 * Kingdom of Kandy
 * Sultanate of Bali
 * Ulster
 * Benin Empire
 * Monaco
 * Bruneian Empire
 * Nogai Horde
 * Perak Sultanate
 * Kingdom of Kotte
 * Jaffna kingdom
 * Moghulistan
 * Four Oirat
 * Champa
 * Cherokee
 * Republic of Cospaia
 * Crimean Khanate
 * Muscogee
 * Gujarat Sultanate
 * Tír Eoghain
 * Garha-Mandla
 * Chanda-Sirpur
 * Deogarh-Nagpur
 * Sheikdom of al-Hassa
 * Hausa Kingdoms
 * Rinpungpa
 * Wyandot people
 * Kingdom of Ava
 * Iroquois
 * Bornu Empire
 * Swahili people
 * Kazakh Khanate
 * Knights Hospitaller
 * Cambodia
 * Khandesh Sultanate
 * Oman
 * Leinster
 * Lan Na
 * Sultanate of Makassar
 * Sultanate of Maldives
 * Phagmodrupa Dynasty
 * Mali Empire
 * Oyo Empire
 * Manipur
 * Kingdom of Mutapa
 * Shawnee
 * Nepal
 * Kingdom of Desmond
 * Kingdom of Mrauk U
 * Northern Yuan dynasty

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:53, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Flag of the Kingdom of Croatia (925).svg

Hispanic America at 1600
In the last change, Nihlus1 introduced a source for Hispanic America population at 1620 that contradicts all historiography on the subject and even the few direct explicit sources we have. The source is that "Wilson", that after check the disorganized list of sources seems to allude to Wilson, Peter H. (2009). Europe's Tragedy: A History of the Thirty Years War., a title focused in that central european war, by a non-specialist historian on colonial Hispanic America, Early Modern Age on the Americas or historical demographics, that offer shocking estimation of 1.5 M native americans, 175,000 "european descendants" and 175,000 mixed people + african descendants, numbers extremely lower than those we can see in historiography or direct sources. I think Wilson confuse the number offered by some of the authors for specific regions with "all Hispanic America". Maybe with other groups happens something similar.

To put things in perspective before offer the estimations, at 1800 according the late colonial census (1775-1810 depending region, some with several in different years, the most "accurate" during colonial period) and Alexander Von Humbolt estimations, Hispanic America before Indepedence Wars would have slightly under 17 million inhabitants, with over 7.5-9 million native americans (still majority or pretty close counting only those living in the "hispanic" zone, not the independent natives), while over 5 million would be mixed people (socially, there were many "mixed" people in other categories), over 3 million european descendants and close to 1 million "blacks" (majoritary free and not counting those socially considered mixed). How many people lived in Hispanic America 200 years before?

For native populations we have many estimations based mostly on the counts of tributary population under encomienda or mita systems. Some natives were excluded from the system however, all the allies of the spaniards during the conquests (tlaxaltecans in Mexico or huancas in Perú e.g.), those from encomiendas that extinguised (intially all should do in two generations or some more, one-three encomendero lives, and despite many were "illegally" prolonged for centuries, others just disappeared in few generations) or the natives living in the cities or emigrated to isolated areas or distant regions (some of them precisely to evade the tributary work). Those encomienda counts usually only include adult males so authors must estimate how many women and children should be added to the count. Some of the estimations:

- Mexico: McCaa R. in his article ¿Fue el  siglo  XVI  una  catástrofe  demográfica  para  México? offer projections for 1595 using the numbers that most known authors proposed until that date (1995), because only some of those authors offer numbers specifically for that year (Cook & Borah e.g.), but it's possible to extrapolate the number for 1595 using their calculations of the population evolution in different but similar dates. The numbers by authors would be: Cook & Borah (1.5M), Zambardino (1.1M-1.7M), Cook & Simpson (2.1-3M), Aguirre Beltran (2M), Mendizabal (2.4M) and Rosenblat (3.5). So Mexico native population at 1595 alone it's enough to equal or surpass Wilson number wrongly used for all Hispanic America, 1.1 to 3,5 M

- Perú: Noble David Cook at Demographic Collapse Indian Peru, 1520-1620 (1981), p. 94 in its general decline hypothesis based mostly in 1580 tributary natives count (222.570 people, mostly adult males so he multiply that number by almost 5 to reach the 1,106,662 he offer for 1580 and comparing with much lower XVII tributary natives count he calculated 851,994 native americans for Perú at 1600.

- Peru-Bolivia-Ecuador: Daniel E. Shea in A Defense of Small Population Estimates for the Central Andes in 1520, chapter included in Denevan, William M. The Native Population of the Americas in 1492 (1992) estimated for Central Andes a population of 1.4-1.47 M, from which only 0.93-0.97 M correspond to Perú, using a lower multiplier than the finally used by N.D. Cook. So slightly over 1M for 1600.

- Paraguay + Guairá: Jose L. Mora Merida at Historia Social del Paraguay 1600-1650 (1973), estimates using an official "Memoria" (a general count probably ordered by the Buenos Aires governor, Hernandarias, the first criollo one) the following numbers for 1617: Paraguay 28,200; Guayrá 115.170.

- Tucumán (northwestern provinces of Argentina): Adolfo Luís Gonzalez Rodriguez at La Encomienda en Tucumán (1984), p. 87, estimates 50,000 native americans under encomienda at Tucumán governorate + 12,000 outside the encomienda and semi-autonomous yet at Calchaquí Valley.

We have between 2.7 and 5.2 M native americans only counting those regions, adding Chile, Colombia, Venezuela, all central America and the tiny populations still surviving in the Great Antilles the total native population at spanish controlled area at 1600 would reach 4-7 million native american people, probably higher if we count the numerous native americans living in the spanish area but outside encomienda system.

For european descendants, we have the numerous city "counts" by different authorities and travellers and the two complete works with demographic data for all hispanic territories in America at the time, Lopez de Velasco's Geografía y descripción general de las Indias for 1570s and specially Compendio y descripción de las Indias Occidentales by the friar Vazquez de Espinosa with data from his travels during the 1610s, counting respectively 35,000 and 75,000 vecinos for hundreds of cities of Hispanic America. Vecinos in spanish proto-census tradition refers almost exclusively to adult males, so historians multiply those numbers for 4.5-6 depending era and context (similar to the case of french "feu" in protocensus), so the number of "european descendants" would surpass the 175,000 mentioned by Wilson already at 1570, while the fastly growing "spaniard" population would be more than double to almost triple by 1600. Another relevant perspective to understand how extremely low is 175k spaniards/other europeans for 1600 is that of the migration studies: Most scholars estimate 200,000 to 250,000 immigrants for 1493-1600 period, with the biggest concentration around 1580s-1620s(according Mörner e.g. focusing in the shipping movements, but also pointed by other authors that noted the spectacular growth that happened in the decades around the change of century in dozens hispanic-american cities). Boyd-Bowman, Magnus Mörner, Martinez Shaw, are some of those scholars. The author that offer the lowest estimation for early immigration is Auke P. Jacobs, which offer just 105,000 migrants for 1493-1600. However that's already high enough to estimate much higher population for 1600 by natural growth and considering most other authors positions around emigration and the other demographic data, that 175k estimation that Wilson uses falls way below any reasonable number. Specially relevant still under emigration perspective is the fact that the emigration seems to have stopped almost completely since 1650s and remained at very low levels until end of colonial era, so the 3.3 M fully or mostly "euro-descendants" at 1800 needs a bigger numer for 1600 and 1650 to justify the growth of both european descendants and mixed groups.

The estimation by Rosenblat current Hispanic America territories at 1620 (the approx final date for Vazquez de Espinosa info) is 8,395,000 native americans, 575k europeans and 775k mixed people and african descendants.

--81.0.7.77 (talk) 21:37, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Updated. Please inform me if I should have used the numbers from another author, like Zambardino or Mendizabal. Alternatively, should the population of Spanish America for 1600 and 1700 be changed as well? — Preceding unsigned comment added by RedStorm1368 (talk • contribs) 01:49, 18 November 2021 (UTC)