Body Count of the Roman Empire
necrometrics.com
Body Count of the Roman Empire
1–10 of 66 posts
Re: Body Count of the Roman Empire
#2Listen, and understand: The Roman legion is out there. It can't be bargained with. It can't be reasoned with. It doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop... ever, until you are dead.
Re: Body Count of the Roman Empire
#3Smaller than Russian losses during WWII.
Re: Body Count of the Roman Empire
#4[deleted]
Re: Body Count of the Roman Empire
#5Smaller than Russian losses during WWII.
Even when accounting for percentage of population?
Re: Body Count of the Roman Empire
#6Smaller than Russian losses during WWII.
The USSR's population in 1939 (immediately pre-war) was about 188 million.
The peak Roman Empire population, in ~160 CE, was 60-70 million. Less than half that of the USSR. Still, the war dead over the empires history are just 1.25% of its peak instantaneous population. So yes, war was overall less deadly. But being an infant was far deadlier than today (~50% mortality by age 5).
Total Soviet casualties: 20-27 million, or 13.7% of the 1940 population. Compare against Poland at about 17%.
By contrast, the Third Reich saw ~8.5% population losses. The US and UK, less than 1% each, France, 1.4%.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demography_of_the_Roman_Empi...
Consider that there was a vastly increased ability to deliver and effect damage on both military and civilian targets in WWII. I'm not sure that a direct comparison is particularly meaningful. And I don't much encourage one-upmanship in this particular sphere.
Re: Body Count of the Roman Empire
#7The author of this seems to have quit on the Eastern (Byzantine) empire several hundred years early...
Re: Body Count of the Roman Empire
#8Smaller than Russian losses during WWII.
The USSR's population in 1939 (immediately pre-war) was about 188 million. The peak Roman Empire population, in ~160 CE, was 60-70 million. Less than half that of the USSR. Still, the war dead over the empires history are just 1.25% of its peak instantaneous population. So yes, war was overall less deadly. But being an infant was far deadlier than today (~50% mortality by age 5). Total Soviet casualties: 20-27 millio…
To add to your point - due to mechanization, and fossil fuel-operated logistics, participants in WWII could field much larger armies. In ancient and medieval societies, a huge portion of the population was needed to work full-time to feed relatively small groups of artisans/warriors/politicians.
In contrast, in WWII, the Red Army conscripted 33 million men. One sixth of the population.
Re: Body Count of the Roman Empire
#9This is (oddly enough) a part of Matthew White's "Historical Atlas of the 20th Century", one of my favourite early history sites.
Re: Body Count of the Roman Empire
#10For anyone interested in historical atrocities, "The Great Big Book of Horrible Things: The Definitive Chronicle of History's 100 Worst Atrocities" by Matthew White hardcover is on sale for $7. Oddly, the Kindle version is $10 and paperback $11.