• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Population of Georgia


I didn't write about this in my main suggestion post on the first page or in the old thread, since it's such a contentious topic, but I can't keep ignoring the issue forever, so here goes:

The subject of Georgia's historical demography is widely debated, both in Georgian scholarly circles and by foreign historians. However, this is most often only in the context of ethnic-linguistic boundaries and religious divisions in parts of Georgia like Abkhazia, Tao-Klarjeti, Inner Kartli, and Hereti.

Unfortunately, not much thought is given to the population of Georgia as a whole. When searching for material about this matter, the only literature I could find were nearly 100-year-old observations by Ivane Javakhishvili and some works about regional censuses in the 18th century.

Regarding the time frame in question, the singular source we can use to determine the population of the kingdom is the widely cited, but barely understood, Mongol census of 1254. According to Roin Metreveli in "The Cambridge History of the Mongol Empire":

The Georgian source (Zamtaaghmtsereli) stresses that from the 1250s the Mongols began to introduce order into the taxation system. They attempted to determine the scale of income the subordinated countries could give and the number of troops they could supply. To this end the Mongols conducted a census in their dominions (evidence on this is also found in the Armenian historians Kirakos Ganjaketsi, Grigor Aknertsi, and Vardan Areweltsi). The census was conducted in 1254, under Möngke Qa’an (r. 1251–1259), and directed by his governor Argun Aqa: “the whole population of David’s kingdom was in great distress. And lists of everything were made, starting with people and ending with beasts, from fields to vineyards, and from orchards to vegetable gardens. And from every nine well-off peasants they took one for military service.” By this rule, the Gurjistan Vilayet had to supply 90,000 warriors.

This number of "90,000 men per every 9 families" has been interpreted differently by different authors, and depending on their background, have been transformed into population estimates of varying accuracy. The real issue lies in estimating family sizes in that time frame.

Donald Rayfield, one of the most renowned and respected Kartvelologists, in his "Edge of empires" suggests a number of 2,5 million inhabitants in Georgia, a rather conservative estimate:

"Worst of all was qalani, or conscription, which, after the 1254 census, was set at one soldier per nine registered male householders. (The Georgian army could field 90,000 men, which puts the population of Georgia and Christian Armenia then at around two and a half million.)"

Ivane Javakhishvili, "the father of Georgian historiography", places the number as high as 5 million, according to Mzia Shelia in "Ivane Javakhishvili’s Contribution to the Formation and Development of Demographic Science in Georgia":

"Despite this difficulty, Iv. Javakhishvili was the person who attempted, for the first time, to determine the number of the population of Georgia in the 13th century. According to his estimation based on the population census carried out by the Mongols in 1254, “there must have been at least 5
million inhabitants in the Kingdom of Georgia at that time. This number, of course, included not only Georgians, but also representatives of other nationalities who belonged to Georgia. It can be seen from these reports, how dense the population was in Georgia at that time, despite the fact that the country had already experienced the horrors of two invasions by Jalaleddin and Genghis Khan, which resulted in a quite large number of casualties”


Above: the Mongol division of Georgia into administrative units, between 1245-47


According to me, a literal who, I think the truth lies somewhere between those two estimates. Considering the fact that under Giorgi V the extortionate nature of Mongol taxation ceased, and taxation/tribute was no longer paid at all since 1330, we can say that population growth definitely began to recover in ~1320 at the latest. Hence, considering everything stated above, I think a population of 2,5-3 million pops in Georgia would be best.

Some other notes:

  • Primarily increase the number of rural settlements/pops: even at the height of Georgia's golden age, it's believed that 90% of the population was still rural. The sizes of cities as per the old thread are mostly fine (though Akhaltsikhe and "Sukhumi" are arguably too small).
  • Increase the population in Tao-Klarjeti (province of Meskheti): one of the key reasons as to why Samtskhe succeeded in establishing peace and prosperity within its borders was due to its geographic location, being far from the steppes of Azerbaijan or inner Anatolia (in many ways mirroring the success of the Kingdom of the Iberians). Hence, I think its population should be more numerous than it currently is.
  • Development: it's mostly fine, though I would, again, increase it slightly in the province of Meskheti, along with parts of coastal western Georgia, primarily in "Sukhumi" (which should be renamed to Tskhumi).

As literal who myself, I'm more inclined to trust the higher end of the estimates (4-5 million) than the lower. If there are 90,000 x 9 well-off households in Georgia, then even a pretty conservative "there are 4 people per household" already brings us to easily over 3 million people, without even including those who apparently aren't well-off. Of course it would be presumptuous of me to deign to speak with more authority than any of the sources you've cited.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
As literal who myself, I'm more inclined to trust the higher end of the estimates (4-5 million) than the lower. If there are 90,000 x 9 well-off households in Georgia, then even a pretty conservative "there are 4 people per household" already brings us to easily over 3 million people, without even including those who apparently aren't well-off. Of course it would be presumptuous of me to deign to speak with more authority than any of the sources you've cited.
I haven't read the actual passage in the chronicle, so I am not sure what the "well-off" bit means (to dispel a myth, Georgians can't actually read texts from hundreds or a thousand years ago without great difficulty, unlike the Greeks).

Regarding population estimates, I'm always more inclined to believe more conservative ones, especially those in the Caucasus, plus, considering the fact that Paradox purportedly has a very accurate population model that they use on a global level, I am very much on the "conservative" side of the argument.

Disregarding actual numbers, game balance must also be considered. After all, in a video game such as this one, gameplay, narrative, and overall fun always take precedence over pure historicity. Just look at Temür Lang "Borjigin" for an example not far from the Caucasus.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
After all, in a video game such as this one, gameplay, narrative, and overall fun always take precedence over pure historicity. Just look at Temür Lang "Borjigin" for an example not far from the Caucasus.
Plus the devs need to leave some low-hanging fruit for modders to fix.

(I hope the devs reading this can tell I'm only joking)
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I haven't read the actual passage in the chronicle, so I am not sure what the "well-off" bit means (to dispel a myth, Georgians can't actually read texts from hundreds or a thousand years ago without great difficulty, unlike the Greeks).

Regarding population estimates, I'm always more inclined to believe more conservative ones, especially those in the Caucasus, plus, considering the fact that Paradox purportedly has a very accurate population model that they use on a global level, I am very much on the "conservative" side of the argument.

Disregarding actual numbers, game balance must also be considered. After all, in a video game such as this one, gameplay, narrative, and overall fun always take precedence over pure historicity. Just look at Temür Lang "Borjigin" for an example not far from the Caucasus.
Timur definitely should not be Borjigin dynasty.
 
  • 2Like
  • 2
Reactions:
What, the various Kurdish tribes? They absolutely did pick sides between the Ottomans and Safavids and depending on how things went would switch sides to the other.
I can't tell if you tried to answer my question but didn't state it explicitly or didn't understand the question, but I know they did pick and switch sides between the Ottomans and Safavids; I just thought they tended to do it all at once, with little infighting where Kurds were divided between the two. Was I wrong?

Also, as maps don't tend to show it, who did rule Kurdistan directly during the time period? Timur?
 
I suggest renaming the location of "Hereti" in the province of Hereti to Dedoplists'q'aro.

The toponym "Hereti" wasn't relegated to 1 location as it is currently in-game. This is the same complaint as I had in my post about Shirvan.

bruh.png
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
Presuming the analysis of the source is correct, this information is still irrelevant for the game start of 1337.

I feel like your feedback focuses too much on minor landowners. Just because a nobleman held a castle somewhere doesn't make him eligible for countryhood in Project Caesar. If that were the case, some place like England would’ve had to be divided into a hundred countries.

I don't want to add the Principality of Yeghvard

The text clearly states that Azizbek I, the ruler of Yeghvard, was a vassal/servant of Shahanshah III, the ruler of Ani, which means that the province of Bjni came back under Zakarian control between 1300 and 1318.
Alexander Akopyan in his work mentions that Yerevan was the second mint in the principality, although the Bjni fortress was the second most important castle/city of the principality after Ani.

Soviet_Armenian_Encyclopedia
Zrzut ekranu 2025-04-18 141630.png

I. In the Ani Principality, gold, silver and copper coins were minted by Shahanshah III Zakaryan (740s-759/1340s-1358) in Ani (on coins أني Ani بأني "in Ani", or that is, crude آني Ani) on behalf of the Ilkhans and Jochid khans, as well as anonymous types of Ashraf Chobanid and Akhichuk. Also in the Ani Principality, coins were minted in Yerevan (on coins ایروان or ايريوان on behalf of Suleiman and Anushirvan of the Hulaguids.
It is significant that the second mint in the principality was Yerevan, considered a small settlement at that time, and not the second most important fortress of Bjni. Its choice was apparently due to its advantageous location at the intersection of trade routes from Ani through Nakhichevan to Adarbaijan and the road to the north to Kura and Tiflis73.
 
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
I don't want to add the Principality of Yeghvard

The text clearly states that Azizbek I, the ruler of Yeghvard, was a vassal/servant of Shahanshah III, the ruler of Ani, which means that the province of Bjni came back under Zakarian control between 1300 and 1318.
Alexander Akopyan in his work mentions that Yerevan was the second mint in the principality, although the Bjni fortress was the second most important castle/city of the principality after Ani.

Soviet_Armenian_Encyclopedia
View attachment 1282745
I. In the Ani Principality, gold, silver and copper coins were minted by Shahanshah III Zakaryan (740s-759/1340s-1358) in Ani (on coins أني Ani بأني "in Ani", or that is, crude آني Ani) on behalf of the Ilkhans and Jochid khans, as well as anonymous types of Ashraf Chobanid and Akhichuk. Also in the Ani Principality, coins were minted in Yerevan (on coins ایروان or ايريوان on behalf of Suleiman and Anushirvan of the Hulaguids.
It is significant that the second mint in the principality was Yerevan, considered a small settlement at that time, and not the second most important fortress of Bjni. Its choice was apparently due to its advantageous location at the intersection of trade routes from Ani through Nakhichevan to Adarbaijan and the road to the north to Kura and Tiflis73.
Bro, you're contradicting your own sources.

First you quote Armenian Wikipedia (with 1 citation!) which says that Shahanshah III is mentioned as the Lord of Ani in 1357-58.

Now you quote the Soviet Armenian Encyclopaedia (slightly more reliable) which says that he was Lord of Ani at the latest in 1318.

"Ilkhans and Iskhans" says that he was ruler from the 1340s-58.

I am really questioning your ability to conduct research properly. Stop making excerpts from random sources and actually bother to make proper feedback. This is not helping the developers in the slightest.

9710jq.png
 
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
Drawing isn't my strong suit, but here’s what I came up with. A few more proposed changes to the map of the region:
Green — Tsakhur
Red — Akhty
Yellow — Gobustan
Blue — Khizi
The location currently labeled as "Gobustan" should be renamed to "Shirvan."
Additionally, I believe Derbent can be included within the region of Lezgistan, as historically, even in antiquity, this area was considered part of a single region (though under different names). Moreover, Derbent is typically classified as part of the North Caucasus region.
Без названия3_20250418190011.png
 
  • 3Like
Reactions:
Bro, you're contradicting your own sources.

First you quote Armenian Wikipedia (with 1 citation!) which says that Shahanshah III is mentioned as the Lord of Ani in 1357-58.

Now you quote the Soviet Armenian Encyclopaedia (slightly more reliable) which says that he was Lord of Ani at the latest in 1318.

"Ilkhans and Iskhans" says that he was ruler from the 1340s-58.

I am really questioning your ability to conduct research properly. Stop making excerpts from random sources and actually bother to make proper feedback. This is not helping the developers in the slightest.

9710jq.png


After all, the Wikipedia page I provided does not say that he began ruling in 1357-1358, only that his brother the Shirvanshah was mentioned as the ruler of Ani and Bjni in the annals of 1357/1358.
Zrzut ekranu 2025-04-18 165318.png

It is possible that he co-ruled the principality with his father Zaza and after his death took power over the country in 1340.

Shahnshah III was born either in the late 13th century or early 14th century, and may have been already 18 or older; at that age he could have appointed Azizbek I as his vassal and given him the city of Yeghvard.
Zrzut ekranu 2025-04-18 165354.png

The diary of Nerses Grch mentions these events either at the time they occurred or a little later, and in order to be able to give the city of Yeghvard to Azizbek I in 1318, Shahnshah III had to co-rule the principality. This confirms the co-rule of the country by father and son, because it does not say that it was Zaza who appointed Azizbek I as his vassal in the years 1300-1318.

Rectification
Azizbek I was probably a vassal of Shahnshah II and not Shahnshah III and may later have become a vassal of Shahnshah III if he was still alive.

Shahnshah II Died 1320​

Zrzut ekranu 2025-04-18 165533.png
 
Last edited:
I can't tell if you tried to answer my question but didn't state it explicitly or didn't understand the question, but I know they did pick and switch sides between the Ottomans and Safavids; I just thought they tended to do it all at once, with little infighting where Kurds were divided between the two. Was I wrong?
It really just depends on the emirate. Some stuck with the Ottomans; some oscillated between the two. While many did change sides at once, keep in mind that those that did were granted land by the Ottomans at the expense of those that didn't or that were more reluctant.
Also, as maps don't tend to show it, who did rule Kurdistan directly during the time period? Timur?
The Aq Qoyunlu are the main one. While they didn't rule long enough to fully break down the distinct tribal identities, they definitely ruled over that region with direct association with the Kurdish tribes in a way that, had they ruled for longer, would've broken up those previous divisions.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
It's up to Paradox to decide to trust either my or @Aramenian's research. I'm certain they will have already made their own studies into the matter.

Tbh I think we've gone so deep, for better or for worse, that it's way past what a single dev could do with the limited time they have per region. Brilliant outsourcing by Paradox.
 
  • 7
Reactions:
Tbh I think we've gone so deep, for better or for worse, that it's way past what a single dev could do with the limited time they have per region. Brilliant outsourcing by Paradox.
It’s smart on their part, yeah. They’ve probably gotten well over a thousand manhours of research and work done for free from everybody on this forum.
 
Maybe spinning out noble families into building-based countries is the way to give them agency?
I actually really like this idea and I feel like representing noble families somehow is pretty much a requirement for the game to feel immersive. Hopefully there is a practical way to circumvent the "characters don't get transferred between tags" barrier.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
I actually really like this idea and I feel like representing noble families somehow is pretty much a requirement for the game to feel immersive. Hopefully there is a practical way to circumvent the "characters don't get transferred between tags" barrier.
Targeted actions to move people around I think is gonna be the way to go. Definitely doable.
 
Hopefully there is a practical way to circumvent the "characters don't get transferred between tags" barrier.
I feel like if there is, one might be able to mod in most of the Crusader Kings character and vassal features into the game.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Good job! I have some questions and suggestions:

-1-Why do the Jalayrids own Baghdad? In April 1337 the city was the de facto capital of the Hüleguids since that's where Musa Khan retreated after he was defeated in a battle roughly a year earlier, it makes more sense to have Tabriz as the capital of the Jalayrids at game start
-2-I think it's fine to call the language Persian but since the name of the country in game is Iran the region should called Iran as well especially if it contains parts of modern Afghanistan and Pakistan
-3-Rather than just calling the country Iran or Iranian Empire the full name should be "Guarded Domains of Iran" with maybe the name of the ruling dinasty as a prefix(e.g. Ashfarid Guarded Domains of Iran), the name was introduced by the Safavids and was also used as the official name by succeeding dinasties until 1925
-4-Trebizond should be an Empire(tier4 country) at the start so why isn't the tag called Trapezuntine Empire on the map? The rulers had long renounced the claim to the Byzantine throne in the treaty of 1282 and in exchange were recognized with the title of "Emperor and Autocrat of all the East, the Iberians, and the Transmarine Provinces"
-5-Some of the governments should be changed, having steppe hordes in the middle of the region is weird, the Hüleguids, Jalayrids and Gurgan should be settled by 1337 and be a monarchy while some of the minor semi-nomadic clans like the Jurmanids and the Ughanids should be at least tribes and the same goes for Döger, Āl Faḍl, Al' Ali and Al Mira
-6-The Jurmanids and Ughanids should probably have their scripted dinasty named after their country
-7-Rather than having the in game languages be called Circassian, Georgian and Dagestani it would be nicer to name them after their actual language group of which those three language are part of, Pontic (also North west Caucasian), Kartvelian(also South Caucasian) and Caspian(also NE Caucasian), then maybe separate them into dialects in the future and if you think that the Pontic language could be confused with the hellenic culture then it's better to rename the culture to Pontian
-8-Is there a toll in the strait of Hormuz? I don't know if it historically existed, but since you guys mentioned tolls for the Sound and the Bosphorus a long time ago it would be cool to have a way to create them in some specific straits like Gibralitar and Bab-El-Mandeb...



The Jalayirids, Sutayids, Chobanids, Hüleguids and Qasarids should be Steppe Hordes. Primarily for gameplay reasons (stability deriving from military power). They aren't states, per say. They are different factions of a very fresh civil war, all aiming for the same thing, the Ilkhanate. Truthfully, there is no such thing as a specific "steppe horde" government. All of these guys were monarchies IRL. But if we had to compare between say France and the Golden Horde, then these tags' governments resemble more the latter.

This is because they are still pasturalists. Even the Ilkhans at their most "civilized" kept moving their court between summer & winter pastures, IE, Arran, Mughan→Tabriz, Soltaniyeh. If a "steppe horde" is characterized by a pasturalist lifestyle for the elite, and a reliance on pasturalist military power for authority, then these tags are "steppe hordes".



The extent of the borders and the authority of the Ilkhanate were determined by where they could garrison their tümens, which required pasture to sustain their significant herds.

1745049242182.png



 
Last edited:
  • 3Like
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:


The Jalayirids, Sutayids, Chobanids, Hüleguids and Qasarids should be Steppe Hordes. Primarily for gameplay reasons (stability deriving from military power). They aren't states, per say. They are different factions of a very fresh civil war, all aiming for the same thing, the Ilkhanate.

Truthfully, there is no such thing as a specific "steppe horde" government. All of these guys were monarchies IRL. But if we had to compare between say France and the Golden Horde, then these tags' governments resemble more the latter.

This is because they are still pasturalists. Even the Ilkhans at their most "civilized" kept moving their court between summer & winter pastures, IE, Arran, Mughan→Tabriz, Soltaniyeh.

If a "steppe horde" is characterized by a pasturalist lifestyle for the elite, and a reliance on pasturalist military power for authority, then these tags are "steppe hordes".



The extent of the borders and the authority of the Ilkhanate were determined by where they could garrison their tümens, which required pasture to sustain their significant herds.

View attachment 1283115





Additionally @Pavía, even if this mechanic gets removed from the Steppe Horde government, it should be given (and restricted to) the Ilkhanate claimants:

IMG_20250419_113029.png


That is because the situation between the civil war participants (claimants) was fluid. Territory was gained as fast as it was lost.

I should note that the effects should be limited only to the claimants. So a claimant couldn't auto-conquer from a non-claimant, for example. Only from eachothers.


 
Last edited:
  • 2Like
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions: