# Your city's biggest population boom period.



## brisavoine (Mar 19, 2006)

ckm said:


> I'd really like to see some figures about the population of each arrondissement in Paris (if possible). I think central districts (mainly from 1ère to 5ème) were up to 3 or 4 times more populated than now.


The peak of population of the 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th arrondissements occured before 1860. These arrondissements, like the other Paris arrondissements, were created in 1860, so we don't have data from before 1860, but it's quite clear from pre-1860 censuses that the territory of these four arrondissements was more populated before 1861.

Anyway, at the 1861 census the densest arrondissement was the 3rd arrondissement with 84,642 inh. per km² (that's twice more than the densest district of Hong Kong today). In 1861 the 3rd arrondissement had 99,116 inhabitants. Today it has 34,248 inhabitants (1999 census).

As for the 5th and the 6th arrondissement, their peaks of population were reached in 1911 for both. In 1911 the 5th had a population of 121,378 (density: 47,768 inh. per km²) and the 6th had a population of 102,993 (density: 47,815 inh. per km²). Today (2005) thee 5th has a population of 59,300 and the 6th has a population of 45,800.

The only arrondissements that are at their maximum now are the 19th and 13th arrondissements. All other arrondissements had a higher population in the past than now.

In the inner suburbs, many places are also below their historical peaks of population. For example, Levallois-Perret is currently the densest suburb of Paris with a population of 62,500 (as of 2005) and a density of 25,934 inh. per km², which is a higher density than pretty much any European city, but this is nonetheless below the population peak of Levallois-Perret which was reached in 1926 when it had 75,144 inhabitants. 

Most of the inner suburbs of Paris are currently growing very fast (brownfield regeneration, turning former industrial sites into business districts and residential areas), but after decades of de-industrialization and the flight of working classes to the outer suburbs, many of these inner suburbs are yet to recover the levels of population at their peak. For example Saint-Denis, the famous northern inner suburb of Paris where the Stade de France is located, had 85,832 inhabitants at the 1999 census, and grew to 95,800 in 2005, but this is still short of its population peak reached in 1968 when it had 99,268 inhabitants.

Basically there are four types of districts in Greater Paris. First you have the medieval heart of the city, which has experienced tremendous population loss since the 19th century.
E.g.: 1st arrondissement of Paris:
1861: 89,519
1872: 74,286
1911: 59,037
1936: 38,436
1968: 32,332
1999: 16,888

Then the former working class inner suburbs which have lost population, which are now gaining population again, but which have yet to recover their levels of population at their historical peaks (a few arrondissements are also in that situation).
E.g.: Montrouge:
1861: 3,534
1911: 22,771
1962: 45,260
1999: 37,733
2005: 42,200 

A third type is former working class inner suburbs which have lost population with de-industrialization but which have then regenerated their brownfields and have thus grown again to beat their historical peaks of population. The 13th and 19th arrondissements of Paris are also in that situation.
E.g.: Issy-les-Moulineaux:
1861: 6,703
1911: 23,175
1962: 51,776
1982: 45,772
1999: 52,647
2005: 63,000

Then the fourth type is outer suburbs which started their population growth later than the inner suburbs but which have never lost inhabitants and are currently at their peaks of population:
E.g.: Sartrouville:
1861: 1,632
1911: 3,602
1931: 17,354
1954: 21,743
1968: 40,277
1999: 50,219
2005: 52,400

A subtype of the 4th type is the mushroom communities on the outer fringes of the outer suburbs. Bussy-Saint-Georges is a good example of this:
1861: 553
1911: 608
1962: 453
1982: 456
1990: 1,545
1999: 9,194
2006: 17,930


----------



## PedroGabriel (Feb 5, 2007)

Póvoa de Varzim, Porto area. Independent city, not suburb.
1991-2001 23% growth

2001- 2011 INE predicts 19%, some real estate analysts predict 100% growth, using data and trends from 2002-2006. Housing prices already climbed more than 11%(between 2002-2006). by far the highest in Porto metro, even if taking Porto municipality itself.

population 65000 in municipality. 40 thousand in city. But urban area has around 100,000 people. loads of people went living in neighbouring areas, out of the city.


----------



## the spliff fairy (Oct 21, 2002)

Shenzhen
1978 *20,000*
1980 *30,000*
1990 *200,000*
2000 *6,000,000*
2005 *17,000,000* (9million registered, 8 million unregistered). 

It grew on average 15 percent each year before the huge acceleration when China relaxed its migration laws in 2003, the biggest urban jump in history. Its now the densest city in China and at current rates is projected to reach 23 million within the decade, though the authorities are desperately trying to curb the growth.

Its notable as also being one of China's most multicultural cities drawing peoples from all the national minorities from across the country seeking a better life. There are 500,000 aboriginals alone.


----------



## PedroGabriel (Feb 5, 2007)

the spliff fairy said:


> Shenzhen
> 1978 *20,000*
> 1980 *30,000*
> 1990 *200,000*
> ...


OMG! :uh:


----------



## PedroGabriel (Feb 5, 2007)

A Panda living near Shenzhen


----------



## xXFallenXx (Jun 15, 2007)

When i moved to Temecula in about 2002 the population was about 30,000, now it just broke the 100,000 mark. Before 2002 the population was hardly rising so my city's population boom is now and it doesn't really look like it is slowing down any time soon.


----------



## the spliff fairy (Oct 21, 2002)

dont you mean 1 million?


----------



## Chicagoago (Dec 2, 2005)

the spliff fairy said:


> dont you mean 1 million?


That guy is unreal....


----------



## Xusein (Sep 27, 2005)

[email protected] said:


> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Walkman defeats iPod.
> HDD of iPod is made in Toshiba, Japan.
> 
> ...


----------



## foadi (Feb 15, 2006)

the spliff fairy said:


> It grew on average 15 percent each year before the huge acceleration when China relaxed its migration laws in 2003, the biggest urban jump in history. Its now the densest city in China


I can't find any info to back this up. Sauce, pls.


----------



## gappa (Mar 13, 2007)

From Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melbourne :
Melbourne
Population by year 
1836 177 
1851 29,000 
1854 123,000 (gold rush) 
1860 140,000 
1880 280,000 (property boom) 
1890 490,000 
1895 900,000 (economic collapse) 
1956 1,500,000 
1981 2,806,000 
1991 3,156,700 (economic slump) 
2001 3,366,542 
2004 3,592,975 
2006 3,720,300 (2006 estimate) 
2030 4,500,000 (projected) 

Biggest growth was during the gold rush, although last year Melbourne recorded it's largest ever growth in gross (not percentage) population with around 50 000 more people added to the cities population.


----------



## zachus22 (Dec 4, 2006)

beta29 said:


> Without WW2, Berlin would have about 6-10 Mio. inhabitants today.


Yeah, and without the Bubonic Plague Europe would be 35% bigger.


----------



## brisavoine (Mar 19, 2006)

[email protected] said:


> Literacy rate
> [...]
> Paris
> 19 century: 10%


This figure is absolutely not true. I don't know what they teach you in Japan, but if they teach you that, it's a joke. In fact the literacy rate in France in the 19th century was way above 10%, and Paris itself was above the rest of France.

Usually, the way historians can assess the historical literacy rate of a population is by checking the marriage certificates and checking how many people were able to sign their name. In Paris unfortunately all the marriage certificates from before 1860 burnt in the big fire of 1871 during the Paris Commune which entirely destroyed the birth, marriage and death certificates of the city prior to 1860. So we can't check the marriage certificates.

However, we still have the so-called "Civic Certificates" which have survived until today. These "Civic Certificates" were made mandatory during the French Revolution. Between 1792 and 1794 every single inhabitant of Paris (and the rest of France) had to fill in these certificates to testify that they supported the French Revolution. With these we know how many people could write, and how many couldn't.

What the "Civic Certificates" show is that the literacy rate of Parisians was extremely high, much higher than in the rest of France. In total 85% of Parisians were able to at least sign their names in those certificates (from 61% for the lower classes to 97% for the upper classes). So your literacy rate of 10% is way below reality.


----------



## DarkLite (Dec 31, 2004)

*In Las Vegas, the city grew from 258,295 in 1990 to 478,434 in 2000. Or an increase of 85.2%. The largest such increase in gross numbers. Percentage-wise, the city grew fastest from 8,422 in 1940 to 24,624 in 1950, or an increase of 161.6% !*
*Though the metro area has grown from 1.3 Million in 2000 to 2.0 Million today, which INMHO is very rapid for a timeframe of 7 years*.


----------



## Cristovão471 (May 9, 2006)

gappa said:


> From Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melbourne :
> Melbourne
> Population by year
> 1836 177
> ...


I edited it, according to ABS (Australian Bureau of Statistics)
Edited are in Bold btw.


----------



## soup or man (Nov 17, 2004)

Los Angeles

1890 50,395 
1900 102,479 
1910 319,198 
*1920 576,673*
*1930 1,238,048* 
1940 1,504,277 
1950 1,970,358 
1960 2,479,015 
1970 2,816,061 
1980 2,966,850 
1990 3,485,398 
2000 3,694,820 
2005 3,844,829 
2007 4,018,080


----------



## rilham2new (Oct 28, 2006)

JAKARTA , Indonesia

1870 : 65,000
1875 : 99,100
1880 : 102,900
1883 : 97,000 (Krakatau eruption caused a massive tsunami at Jakarta bay)
1886 : 100,500
1890 : 105,100
1895 : 114,600
1901 : 115,900
1905 : 138,600
1918 : 234,700
1920 : 253,800
1925 : 290,400
1928 : 311,000
1930 : 435,184
1940 : 533,000
1945 : 600,000 (Indonesia Independence year)
1950 : 1,733,600
1959 : 2,814,000
1961 : 2,906,533
1971 : *4,546,492*
1980 : *6,503,449*
1990 : *8,259,639*
2000 : 8,384,853
2005 : 8,540,306

The data above only include the main area (it doesnt include suburb area, If does, Metro JKT will got 17-20 million population)

I have no idea, which periode that got such boom...


----------



## mic (Jun 27, 2004)

I think Melbourne will be the same or bigger than Sydney in about 50 years if current trends continue. It's now growing rapidly due to the economy and affordability.

Melbourne is growing by 50,000 x 50 years= 2,500,000 = 3.8 + 2.5= 6,300,000

Sydney is growing by 40,000 x 50 years= 2,000,000 = 4.3 + 2.0 = 6,300,000 

Obviously these figures will change but it will be interesting to see the catch-up between the two international cities of Australia.


----------



## PedroGabriel (Feb 5, 2007)

ilham_rj said:


> JAKARTA , Indonesia
> 
> 1870 : 65,000
> 1875 : 99,100
> ...


US Cities grow with imigration, while that is people having to much children. 1945-50 is really impressive, why that jump?


----------



## [email protected] (May 7, 2007)

I don't know Mumbai and New Delhi.

India :uh: 
Population and Increase rate
1950 : 0.35756 billions : ×
1960 : 0.44234 billions : 2.2%
1970 : 0.55491 billions : 2.3%
1980 : 0.68885 billions : 2.2%
1990 : 0.84641 billions : 2.1%
2000 : 1.169 billions : 1.9%
2005 : 1.1337 billions :　×
2010 : 1.1738 billions : 1.4% 
2020 : 1.31221 billions : 1.1% 
2030 : 1.41657 billions : 0.8% 
2040 : 1.48571 billions : 0.5% 
2050 : 1.59 bilions : 0.3% 
2090 : 1.79 billions : 0.3%


----------



## polako (Apr 7, 2005)

Threehundred said:


> Los Angeles
> 
> 1890 50,395
> 1900 102,479
> ...


During the 1920's Los Angeles was probably the fastest growing city in the world.


----------



## brisavoine (Mar 19, 2006)

polako said:


> During the 1920's Los Angeles was probably the fastest growing city in the world.


I'm afraid this is not the case, at least not in absolute terms. This is what I could find.

Population increase between 1920 and 1930 (except Paris and London which are between 1921 and 1931):
- Tokyo Prefecture: +1,709,250 inhabitants
- NYC and the New Jersey counties of Hudson, Essex, and Bergen: +1,707,672
- Moscow: +1,500,000
- Los Angeles County: +1,272,037
- Greater Paris: +1,022,981
- Cook County (Chicago): +929,106
- Greater London: +723,632
- Wayne County (Detroit): +711,301
- Greater Berlin (Groß-Berlin): +300,000


----------



## polako (Apr 7, 2005)

brisavoine said:


> I'm afraid this is not the case, at least not in absolute terms. This is what I could find.
> 
> Population increase between 1920 and 1930 (except Paris and London which are between 1921 and 1931):
> - Tokyo Prefecture: +1,709,250 inhabitants
> ...


I meant percentage growth.


----------



## NorthStar77 (Oct 8, 2003)

Oslo's population increased 24 fold in the 19'th century, thanks to it becoming the capital of Norway(again). And we're in the middle of a boom period now, with 2% annual increase. The increase from 1925 to 1951 was because administrative borders changed.

*1801	9,500
1825	15,400
1855	31,700
1875	76,900
1900	227,900*
1925	255,700
1951	434,365
1960	471,511
1970	487,363
1980	454,872
*1990	458,364
2000	507,467
2007(april 1'st)	551,832*


----------



## xlchris (Jun 23, 2006)

Amsterdam;


----------



## pan_tomas (Sep 24, 2002)

Łódź (Lodz) (Lodsch)

1810	514	
1821	1 855	
1830	4 343	
1850	15 764	
1860	32 639	
1872	100 000	
1886	232 000	
1897	283 206	
1915	600 000	
1918	341 800	After WW1
1921	452 000	
1931	605 500	
1939	672 000	
1945	302 000	After WW2
1950	620 000	
1960	710 500	
1970	761 800	
1980	830 000	
1998	806 700	
2000	793 200


----------



## Petr (May 8, 2004)

*Warsaw*

XV w.: 6 000
*1700: 30 000
1792: 120 000*
1800: 63 000 after the partitions of Rzeczpospolita
1830: 139 000
*1850: 163 000
1882: 383 000
1900: 686 000
1914: 885 000
1925: 1 003 000
1939: 1 289 000*
1941: 1 350 000
1942: 1 027 000
1943: 956 000
1944: 162 000 after the Warsaw Uprising
1945: 422 000
1956: 1 000 000
1960: 1 139 200
1970: 1 315 600
1975: 1 436 100
1980: 1 596 100
1990: 1 611 800
1998: 1 650 000
2003: 1 689 600
2006: 1 702 139


----------



## Petr (May 8, 2004)

pan_tomas said:


> Łódź (Lodz) (Lodsch)
> 
> 1810	514
> 1821	1 855
> ...


2006 760 251


----------



## sk (Dec 6, 2005)

nicosia`s population

1992.....181,234 k
1995.....193,000 k
1996.....195,700 k
1997.....198,200 k
1998.....200,200 k
1999.....202,300 k
2000.....204,100 k
2001.....206,200 k
2002.....208,900 k
2003.....213,500 k
2004.....219,200 k
2005.....224,500 k


this is an increase of 43,266 k people in 13 years.

cyprus`s population in 1992 was 615,130 k
cyprus`s population in 2005 was 766,400 k

nicosia`s population as a percentage of the total population was 29,47% in 1992
nicosia`s population as a percentage of the total population was 29,29% in 2005


----------



## Blijdorp (Oct 18, 2005)

ilham_rj said:


> JAKARTA , Indonesia
> 
> 1870 : 65,000
> 1875 : 99,100
> ...



Indonesia became independent in 1949 not 45. At least Jakarta was occupied untill 1949.
Anyway it's an impressive growth!


----------



## bob rulz (Oct 20, 2005)

*Salt Lake City:*

Founded in 1847

1850: 6,000
1860: 8,236
1870: 12,854
1880: 20,768
1890: 44,843
1900: 53,531
1910: 92,777
1920: 116,110
1930: 140,627
1940: 149,934
1950: 182,121
1960: 189,454
1970: 175,885
1980: 163,034
1990: 159,936
2000: 181,743
2005 estimate: 182,046

So our greatest growth occurred from the 1880s through the 1920s (during the 1880s percentage-wise and 1900s number-wise), and again in the 1940s after the slowdown of the 1930s (due to the Great Depression). Pretty good growth occurred again in the 1990s, but I think that's mainly because of lower vacancy rates rather than new development. New development downtown and expected development on the west side of the city are expected to increase the total slightly by 2010 and quite a bit by 2020.

The metropolitan area is currently undergoing by far its fastest growth. In the valley, rapid development began just to the south and southeast (South Salt Lake, Millcreek, and Holladay) of the city after World War II, then around Kearns on the west and in the center of the valley around Midvale and Murray, and also just north of the valley in Bountiful. By the 1960s it had expanded through Taylorsville, into current areas of West Valley City, as well as across the east bench. By the 1970s it exploded north into Centerville and to the south in the Cottonwood Heights area, Sandy, and West Jordan, as well as west through Taylorsville and West Valley City. There was a slowdown in the 1980s, but it continued in the same general areas. In the 1990s, the far southern area of the valley around West Jordan, South Jordan, Riverton, Bluffdale, and Draper. Since then it has moved even further south and west, focusing on South Jordan, Riverton, much of Draper, Bluffdale, and Herriman, with explosive growth moving into northern and northwestern Utah County with Lehi, Saratoga Springs (entirely new), and Eagle Mountain (also entirely new).


----------



## Veinticinco (Sep 13, 2005)

Kids in the riot said:


> Manchesters population grew from 95,000 - 1,435,000 in 100 years (1800 - 1900) becoming the worlds ninth city:
> 
> Worlds biggest cities in the year 1900
> 
> ...


That's wierd, I thought Liverpool was Britain's second city during that time, as the world's largest port, and Liverpool had a population of around 684,947 city proper back then? Surely being second city we would have had the second largest population?



> Since the formation of the UK, Bristol, Glasgow, and Liverpool have all also been seen as the second city, and indeed Glasgow was often described as the second city of the entire British Empire in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.[5] All three cities were prominent because of their economic importance, especially the central role which they played in overseas trade, and are still some of the largest cities in the country.


No mention of Manchester.. :dunno:




> By the start of the nineteenth century, 40% of the world's trade was passing through Liverpool and the construction of major buildings reflected this wealth. In 1830, Liverpool and Manchester became the first cities to have an intercity rail link, through the Liverpool and Manchester Railway. The population continued to rise rapidly, especially during the 1840s when Irish migrants began arriving by the thousands as a result of the Great Famine, leading to sectarian tension and violence[citation needed]. By 1851, approximately 25% of the city's population was Irish-born. During the first part of the 20th century, Liverpool was drawing emigrants from across Europe.


"The population of Liverpool peaked in the 1931 census, which reported *855,688* inhabitants. This had declined to *610,114 by 1961*, and decreased further to *439,476 in the 2001* census."

This was down to massive economic decline, from one of the richest cities in the world to one of the poorest cities in Europe, the population was almost halved but is starting to climb again.


----------



## gruber (Jun 11, 2004)

*Milan *

_Estimate_

700 Before Christ - settled by Insubres Celts as Mediolanum

100 After Christ - >100.000
300 - >200.000 - CAPITAL OF ROMAN EMPIRE
400 - <120.000
1288 - >210.000
1449 - >100.000

_Offical Census_

1580 - 108.000
1599 - 112.000
1629 - 132.000
1632 - 70.000 - GREAT PLAGUE
1750 - 110.118
1760 - 108.000 
1780 - 134.089
1795 - 134.437
1861 - 196.109 
1871 - 243.109
1881 - 321.839 
1901 - 491.460 
1911 - 710.000 
1921 - 818.000 
1931 - 992.036
1951 - 1.278.222
1961 - 1.582.534
1971 - 1,729,269
1973 - 1,743,427 - PEAK
1981 - 1,604,773 
1991 - 1,369,231 
2001 - 1,256,211 
2006 - 1,308,735 


*For the Metro Area the top is today with over 7.500.000.*

_World Official Census of Metro Areas - Onu_

1950 - 3,633,000 - 14th world ranking
1955 - 4,045,000 - 14th world ranking
1960 - 4,504,000 - 17th world ranking
1965 - 4,994,000 - 18th world ranking
1970 - 5,528,000 - 18th world ranking
1975 - 5,529,000 - 21th world ranking 
1980 - 5,334,000 - 24th world ranking 
1985 - 4,984,000 - 30th world ranking 

_Esitmate_

1990 - 5,600,000 - 32th world ranking 
1995 - 6,200,000 - >40th world ranking
2000 - 6,900,000 - 35th world ranking

_Official data by OCSE_

2005 - 7,500,000 - 28th world ranking - PEAK OF METRO AREA


----------



## eusebius (Jan 5, 2004)

Leiden

1389 - 4.000
1573 - 15.000
1622 - 45.000
1670 - 70.000 (2. city in HOL)
1795 - 30.995
1815 - 27.000
1850 - 37.000 (5. city in NL)
1900 - 54.000
2007 - 118.000

Arnhem

1233 - 3.000
1795 -10.500
1830 - 14.500
1850 - 19.218
1900 - 57.000 (7. city, Leiden 8.)
1910 - 64.000
1960 - 124 241
1968 - 135 090 (peak)
1977 - 125 576 (lowpoint)
2007 - 144 000

Arnhem expanded rapidly after the railways were built (1845) and employment, mainly _non_-industrial, increased.


----------



## 909 (Oct 22, 2003)

Population growth of Emmen, in the north-eastern part of the Netherlands.


----------



## eusebius (Jan 5, 2004)

It might be even more interesting comparing the amount of households, as that would give a better indication to the size of a town or city. A place like Arnhem got flooded with the elderly and wealthy between 1845 and 1890. Figures give the amount of inhabitants but these exclude the number of hotel and 'pension' guests. A good indication would for example be the size of the city's post office, or railway station.

Look at Vienna, Budapest, Dresden and Prague! These cities didn't fall behind compared to Paris and London at some stage.


----------



## dutchmaster (May 23, 2007)

Porto Alegre:


----------



## modestproposal (May 18, 2007)

For the Baltimore-Washington Metropolitan Area the biggest growth period is now, beginning in 2000 we've added over 100,000 people per year to the metro area bringing us up to about 8.5 million now and putting us at the world's 6th or 7th largest economy.


----------



## Unsing (Apr 15, 2006)

Tokyo Prefecture









Population statistics of the areas *presently* recognized as Greater Tokyo and Greater Osaka (Osaka-Kyoto-Kobe). Not showing the actual city size of each period.

red:Greater Tokyo green:Greater Osaka










Share of population in the whole country


----------



## Mikejesmike (Jan 20, 2007)

New York City and borough peaks

1790--------33,111 
1800--------60,489 
1810--------96,373 
1820------123,706 
1830------202,589 
1840------312,710 
1850------515,547 
1860------813,669 
1870------942,292 
1880---1,206,299 
1890---1,515,301 
1900---3,437,202 First consolidation census
1910---4,766,883 Manhattan 2,331,542
1920---5,620,048 
1930---6,930,446 
1940---7,454,995 
1950---7,891,957 Brooklyn 2,738,175
1960---7,781,984 
1970---7,894,862 Bronx 1,471,701
1980---7,071,639 
1990---7,322,564 
2000---8,008,278 Queens 2,229,379 Staten Island 443,728
2005---8,213,839 

If all counties were at their peak at the same time
9,214,515


----------



## Blijdorp (Oct 18, 2005)

Wow phenomenal growth for New York.
For Rotterdam municipality:

1796: 53,200 inhabitants 
1830: 72,300 
1849: 90,100 
1879: 148,100 
1899: 318,500 
1925: 547,900 
1965: 731,000 
1984: 555,000 
2005: 596,407 
2006: 588,576 

Between 1875 and 1900 the population grew with 200.000


----------



## xlchris (Jun 23, 2006)

Hoofddorp, my city, is becoming a city!

1950 - 5000
1970 - 9000
2006 - 68.000
2007 - 70.300

_[*Parts in Hoofddorp; *Kalorama, Beukenhorst, Arnolduspark, Centrum, Fruittuinen, Piratenwijk, Graan voor Visch, Graan voor Visch-Zuid, Noord, Oud-West, Pax, Toolenburg-Oost, Toolenburg-Zuid, Vrijschot-Noord, Bleesland, Vrijschot-Zuid, Bornholm *(<I live there)*, Toolenburg-West, Overbos, Floriande(Noor, Zuid, IJwijk, Sportdorp and Boseilanden]_


----------



## Project-D (Jun 8, 2006)

Looks to me that all the great British cities suffered some of the worst population lost in the post war years & are only now just recovering. Goes to show how badly this country was run after the war!


----------



## Brandon1978 (Aug 31, 2006)

Monkey said:


> London's population grew 6 times bigger in the 19th century:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_London#Population
> 
> The biggest growth would have been in the 1880's-1900, at the peak of the British Empire.
> ...


It's interesting to note the population drop between 400 and 500, when the Roman legions withdrew from Britain about 410 (and collapsed in the west about 476 with the last emperor). It's always benefited from its nearness to the Thames estuary and trade across the North Sea with the Continent.


----------



## brisavoine (Mar 19, 2006)

^^Bear in mind that any figure before 1801 (first official census) is just guesstimate, especially for periods as far back as 15 centuries ago.


----------



## GENIUS LOCI (Nov 18, 2004)

gruber said:


> *Milan *
> 
> _Estimate_
> 
> ...


Part of Milan metro area urbanization during the years


----------



## gianandrea (Jan 25, 2006)

Turin (Torino - Italy)

1861 173 000
1871 210 000
1881 250 000
1901 329 000
1911 415 000
1921 499 000
1931 590 000
1936 629 000
1951 719 000
1961 1 025 000
1971 1 167 000
1974 1 202 846
1990 991 670
2000 901 010
2007 902 612 (at 03/31/2007)

All data are about population in municipal borders
Turin urban area population is about 1 700 000


----------



## Rahmani (Jun 14, 2006)

xlchrisij said:


> Amsterdam;


Why was there a major decline between 1963 and 1984?


----------



## Rahmani (Jun 14, 2006)

Blijdorp said:


> Wow phenomenal growth for New York.
> For Rotterdam municipality:
> 
> 1796: 53,200 inhabitants
> ...


Same question as for amsterdam. What happend between 1965 and 1984?


----------



## im_from_zw038 (Dec 5, 2003)

Well for my city, Zwolle (Netherlands) i guess it's now. Last period we broke some records, the 50.000 house was build, we reached the number of 115.000 citicens, economically in the top-3 of the strongest cities in the country, and currently we have the biggest new residential neighborhood of the north-eastern part of our country being developed now.


----------



## 909 (Oct 22, 2003)

Rahmani said:


> Same question as for amsterdam. What happend between 1965 and 1984?


Suburbanization.


----------

