Philip Hart wrote: > > On Fri, 23 Jul 2004, Ken Koester wrote: > > >>This seems much too conservative. Agrarian France had 26M+; Britain, >>5.6M+. Europe as a whole could not have been less than 60M, and the >>Empire is *at least* as large as Europe, to judge from travelling times >>(before teleportation, that is). China must have had at least 100M. . . >>. ah, I just pulled out my Braudel. In 1650, he cites a population for >>europe (including European Russia) of 100M; for Asia, of 250-330M; for >>Africa, of 100M. Your figures would lead to an extremely depopulated >>Empire, by human--er, Easterner (-: --standards. Not impossible, if the >>birthrate is extremely low. But to be that low, I'd say that all our >>expectations of what an Empire is, or does, or functions would be wildly >>off; the scale simply wouldn't translate to any experiences you care to >>name. > > > > I've long wondered how the agrarian Dragaerans (say that 3x fast) managed > to cope with the overcast. Perhaps they've been experiencing diminishing > crop yields for many cycles now... > > Also maintaining good topsoil for 200k years is probably difficult. Magic? Jose -- Jose Marquez \ Cthulhu 2004 jhereg69 at earthlink.net \ Why vote for http://home.earthlink.net/~jhereg69 \ the lesser evil?