Anonymous
6/30/2025, 6:58:59 AM No.17802784
How many natives lived here in 1492?
Replies:
Thread 17802784 - /his/ [Archived: 760 hours ago]
Anonymous
6/30/2025, 7:00:33 AM No.17802787
Google AI: "population of north america in 1492"
>The estimated population of North America in 1492, before European colonization, varies widely, but most scholars place it between 5 and 15 million people. Some higher estimates reach as high as 18 million, while lower estimates are around 1 million. The "middle ground" estimates, often cited as around 10 million, are based on a combination of archaeological evidence and historical records.
this didn't need to be a thread
>The estimated population of North America in 1492, before European colonization, varies widely, but most scholars place it between 5 and 15 million people. Some higher estimates reach as high as 18 million, while lower estimates are around 1 million. The "middle ground" estimates, often cited as around 10 million, are based on a combination of archaeological evidence and historical records.
this didn't need to be a thread
Replies:
Anonymous
6/30/2025, 7:18:48 AM No.17802826
>>17802784 (OP)
The southwest was sparsely populated before Spaniards showed up with horses. Much of the continental US had populations concentrated on the eastern part of the country.
The majority of amerindians undoubtedly lived in Mesoamerica, but without a real estimate on the output of chinampas there's no reliable base for estimating the population of places like Tenochtitlan.
The southwest was sparsely populated before Spaniards showed up with horses. Much of the continental US had populations concentrated on the eastern part of the country.
The majority of amerindians undoubtedly lived in Mesoamerica, but without a real estimate on the output of chinampas there's no reliable base for estimating the population of places like Tenochtitlan.
Replies:
Anonymous
6/30/2025, 7:54:02 AM No.17802884
>>17802787
>>17802807
>>17802784 (OP)
15 million is a reasonable mid range estimate for Mesoamerica alone, and a decent amount of estimates give it 20 million or more, and OP's pic includes not just Mesoamerica, but the rest of Mexico, all of Central America, and the US, Canada, and the West Indies. The AI response here is laughably wrong
For reference, here are the estimates from "The Native Population of the Americas in 1492" by Denevan, the 1976 column it the First Edition print, the 1992 is the Second Edition print. Going by the 2nd edition numbers, what OP pics shows would have had around 29.6 million people
>>17802826
The ~212,000 population estimate people often give for Tenochtitlan is based on agricultural production and what it could support.
I know >plebbit but all the different comments by 400-rabbits here are a good overview of a bunch of different population estimates for Tenochtitlan: https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1dp8dfn/was_tenochtitlans_population_really_as_big_as/
>>17802807
>>17802784 (OP)
15 million is a reasonable mid range estimate for Mesoamerica alone, and a decent amount of estimates give it 20 million or more, and OP's pic includes not just Mesoamerica, but the rest of Mexico, all of Central America, and the US, Canada, and the West Indies. The AI response here is laughably wrong
For reference, here are the estimates from "The Native Population of the Americas in 1492" by Denevan, the 1976 column it the First Edition print, the 1992 is the Second Edition print. Going by the 2nd edition numbers, what OP pics shows would have had around 29.6 million people
>>17802826
The ~212,000 population estimate people often give for Tenochtitlan is based on agricultural production and what it could support.
I know >plebbit but all the different comments by 400-rabbits here are a good overview of a bunch of different population estimates for Tenochtitlan: https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1dp8dfn/was_tenochtitlans_population_really_as_big_as/
Replies:
Anonymous
6/30/2025, 7:55:07 AM No.17802885
>>17802884
Also I say 15m is a reasonable mid range estimate, but that's me being cautious, desu, going by what most researchers lean towards it's actually more like a low end estimate. Personally i'd say anything below 12ish million is way too low
Also I say 15m is a reasonable mid range estimate, but that's me being cautious, desu, going by what most researchers lean towards it's actually more like a low end estimate. Personally i'd say anything below 12ish million is way too low
Anonymous
6/30/2025, 7:59:18 AM No.17802889
>>17802884
I'd assume the AI was probably using the vernacular definition of North America as just the US and Canada.
I'd assume the AI was probably using the vernacular definition of North America as just the US and Canada.
Replies:
Chud Anon
6/30/2025, 8:03:48 AM No.17802895
Replies:
Anonymous
6/30/2025, 8:12:56 AM No.17802903
>>17802784 (OP)
Wasnt there a massive plague that depopulated the Americas, allowing the Old Worders to easily settle and take over? Was it before or after 1492? What were the native population levels before/after that?
Wasnt there a massive plague that depopulated the Americas, allowing the Old Worders to easily settle and take over? Was it before or after 1492? What were the native population levels before/after that?
Anonymous
6/30/2025, 8:35:15 AM No.17802933
>>17802895
The Mesoamericans probably had land surveys and censuses. All the surviving ones date to the post contact period and show heavy signs of European influence so you could argue that style of codex was exclusively post contact, but say the Oztoticpac land map still has Prehispanic style "writing" for land plots and crop yields which could have likely been a convention in pre contact documents, and written accounts by Spanish and Native sources mention Prehispanic books which count revenue and yields: The Mendoza shows this for tax payments sent to Tenochtitlan, for example, so it being a thing with local production yields, land ownership, and censues is pretty possible too (I forget if we have mentions of prehispanic population counting or not, I vaugely recall them maybe coming up but I'm not super confident(
The Mesoamericans probably had land surveys and censuses. All the surviving ones date to the post contact period and show heavy signs of European influence so you could argue that style of codex was exclusively post contact, but say the Oztoticpac land map still has Prehispanic style "writing" for land plots and crop yields which could have likely been a convention in pre contact documents, and written accounts by Spanish and Native sources mention Prehispanic books which count revenue and yields: The Mendoza shows this for tax payments sent to Tenochtitlan, for example, so it being a thing with local production yields, land ownership, and censues is pretty possible too (I forget if we have mentions of prehispanic population counting or not, I vaugely recall them maybe coming up but I'm not super confident(
Anonymous
6/30/2025, 10:09:40 AM No.17803029
>>17802889
Then the AI's figures are too high
Then the AI's figures are too high
Anonymous
6/30/2025, 11:43:35 AM No.17803163
Around 3-4 million as median estimate. People don't realize how empty the continent was before Euros arrived. 4 million is roughly the population of Utah. Imagine if Utah was the only inhabited state in the Union and then imagine population of Utah spread out across the continent. That's how empty it was
>>17802787
This is wrong btw. 11 million is the highest estimate anyone serious ever got so 10 million is definitely not the middle ground number. The lowest estimate that I know off is 900K with median being between 3 and 4 mil
>>17802787
This is wrong btw. 11 million is the highest estimate anyone serious ever got so 10 million is definitely not the middle ground number. The lowest estimate that I know off is 900K with median being between 3 and 4 mil
Replies:
Anonymous
6/30/2025, 12:01:35 PM No.17803201
Replies:
Anonymous
6/30/2025, 1:57:44 PM No.17803353
>>17803201
Panama isn't generally considered as part of North America
Panama isn't generally considered as part of North America
Replies:
Anonymous
6/30/2025, 2:59:22 PM No.17803495
>>17803353
It literally and unironically is.
It literally and unironically is.
Anonymous
6/30/2025, 3:50:11 PM No.17803609
>>17802787
Why did anglo settlers wipe them all out?
Why did anglo settlers wipe them all out?
Replies:
Anonymous
6/30/2025, 4:33:18 PM No.17803697
>>17803609
The coof, unironically
The coof, unironically