5

So, in a novel a buddy and I are working on, the gods created mankind 3000 years ago, their last act before they perished. The gods left behind several books containing all the knowledge a society would need to grow (agriculture, navigation, domestication of animals, crafting, fire, language, etc.), as well as an enchantment placed upon them that anyone that viewed them would instantly know how to read them.

That aside, we have one civilization that ended up on a peninsula to the far south of the continent. They have a massive desert to their north and nowhere else to go. This peninsula is approximately 58,000 sq km of livable land.

So, the question, assuming they began with a population of about 100 people, what would their population be 3000 years later?

We can assume they always have enough food and water to supply their people. The land they live on is very fertile and water is readily available. It should also be noted that over the years, the population has divided into four separate tribes. I'm not sure if this would have any affect.

Thanks for your time!

EDIT: Someone thought this might be related to farming and feeding a population, but this is not my concern. This place has more than enough food (farming, animals, fish, etc.) to feed their people. I'm more concerned with growth. I've added a comment below to address some of the follow up comments.

It should also be noted that I was assuming a "natural" population growth when I said they'd have enough food. They can't support a massive boom or overpopulation.

EDIT 2: People have pointed that there needs to be a limit to available food. So, guessing they would cultivate somewhere around 20% of available land, how would this affect population growth?

  • This is going to require quite a bit conjecture, but for some foundation: What level of technology (agriculture, medical, education, etc, etc) did they have starting out, and how supportive of life is this peninsula (lush fields ripe for farming and some forest to support industry there, other geography...)? – Ranger Dec 09 '16 at 18:19
  • Also there's a thing called "Minimum viable population" to avoid interbreeding issues with genetics. Assuming there's no effort to curb this (whomever can marry and mate with whomever), Wikipedia gives an outline of a normal minimum of 500 - 1,000. For this reason you might consider upping your initial count of 100. – Ranger Dec 09 '16 at 18:20
  • Their technology level is comparable with the Mayans, though somewhat more advanced in certain things (better farming, better language, better understanding of animals and nature).
  • So, 100 is not really a viable beginning. We could up it to 500 for sure.
  • I disagree about the duplication. They always have enough farmland, I don't think that's an issue. They also have tons of fishing, so food is not a problem. Feeding people is not the issue in question.
  • – user3491276 Dec 09 '16 at 18:33
  • 2
    Do you really mean "58,000 sq ft" ? That is absurdly tiny, it means that (a) hunter/gatherer lifestyle is impossible even for a single family; (b) intensive agriculture is possible for a few people but not 100; (c) in a fishing everything becomes dominated by the how far (how many days travel distance) you're willing to go to "hunt" for fish. Feeding people is absolutely the issue in question. In long term, population equals to carrying capacity and the growth rate matters only for short term fluctuations. – Peteris Dec 09 '16 at 19:26
  • Yeah, there are (rich) people with houses bigger than 58,000 sq ft. Buckingham Palace, for instance, is 828,820 ft² (per Google). – jamesqf Dec 09 '16 at 19:32
  • It was supposed to read sq km. Thanks for pointing that out. – user3491276 Dec 09 '16 at 19:36