2
$\begingroup$

Basically, my world's societies (They're tiny-sized for reasons too complicated to explain in a simple post) are forced to provide about 1 human sacrifice every month (Because reasons) and to fight each other in WW2-esque battles, leading to a high death rate for everyone. These societies are roughly 250 to 300 people strong.

So in the end my question is: Is it sustainable baby-making wise? I'm asking because I'm tremendously bad at mathematics and statistics; I've tried calculating the thing for 4 hours now, and I don't know if its because I'm stupid or because I'm making it too complicated for myself.

Also: Food and resources are not an issue, so women can potentially always be pregnant, and inbreeding mostly doesn't happen due to the high amount of migration between groups.

$\endgroup$
18
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ 249 men and one woman can produce 1 child per year. 1 man and 249 women can produce 249 children per year. Realistically speaking, you will have about 125 males and 125 females; out of the 125 females, about 1/3 will be of child-bearing age. Out the 40 women of child bearing age, about 1/2 or 2/3 would be nursing their children and thus infertile (long story). In a regular human population of 250 people with no birth control you would expect between 10 and 20 children per year; say 15 children per year. If less than 15 people die every year, the population will grow; if more, it will shrink. $\endgroup$ – AlexP Dec 4 '20 at 21:24
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @DKNguyen It's closer to 9.5 months (around 40-41 weeks for full term). Also, they won't be able to conceive the day after they give birth. It's going to be at least a month before they can get pregnant again, and that's if nothing went wrong. If the mother is breastfeeding, that also delays the return of fertility (this isn't especially reliable as a means of contraception, since it's not guaranteed and is affected by diet, but it can be anywhere from 6 to 18 months). You also need to consider miscarriage rates, infant mortality, maternal mortality, etc. This calculation isn't a simple thing. $\endgroup$ – Palarran Dec 4 '20 at 21:33
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Triodixane: Depends on the age, doesn't it? Oh to be 18 again. $\endgroup$ – AlexP Dec 4 '20 at 21:33
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @KeizerHarm: For simple arithmetic? It's the comments section or nothing. You are welcome to copy and paste it into an answer. $\endgroup$ – AlexP Dec 4 '20 at 21:34
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @AlexP What does length or complexity have to do with it? If the answer can be short then that's still an answer. $\endgroup$ – KeizerHarm Dec 4 '20 at 21:35
2
$\begingroup$

By @AlexP in the comments section:

249 men and one woman can produce 1 child per year. 1 man and 249 women can produce 249 children per year. Realistically speaking, you will have about 125 males and 125 females; out of the 125 females, about 1/3 will be of child-bearing age. Out the 40 women of child bearing age, about 1/2 or 2/3 would be nursing their children and thus infertile (long story). In a regular human population of 250 people with no birth control you would expect between 10 and 20 children per year; say 15 children per year. If less than 15 people die every year, the population will grow; if more, it will shrink.

I'd just like to throw in how twins occur in about one in 250 pregnancies, and triplets in about one in 10,000 pregnancies.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.