[HPforGrownups] Re: Wizarding numbers: 24 000

[Robert Shaw]

No: HPFGUIDX 83229

o_caipora wrote:
> Another way of looking at it is "How many do you need?"
> 
> How many people does it take to form a stable, distinct ethnic group
> in a larger society?
> 
That depends on how cohesive the ethnic group is, a result
of assorted cultural factors.

There are ample reasons why wizard society would be highly
cohesive, starting with its minimal interaction with muggle
society.

> Here's some numbers:
> Population of Great Britain: 60,000,000
> Population of Scotland:       5,000,000
> Jews in Great Britain:          285,000
> Romany (Gypsies) in G.B.:       120,000
> 
> Both Jews and Rom have managed to persist as distinct groups over
> hundreds of years in Britian, despite discrimination. That's real
> world evidence that 120,000 is "enough".
> 
But it doesn't establish a minimum.

> Since wizards have longer adult lives, as well as other advantages,
> certainly a smaller number would suffice.
> 
> Another example is Athens, which in its Golden Age had a population
> of about 450,000. Half were slaves, and we can assume whatever they
> did is performed by magic or Muggles. Women weren't educated or allow
> to participate in public life; since wizards don't waste half their
> population, we can assume they'd need half the free adult population
> of Athens. That gets us, again, to a bit under 120,000.

City states are certainly a better standard for comparison but
many of those 120,000 were peasant farmers, whose work is
also done by muggles, so far as we can tell.

The goblins provide financial services to wizards, again reducing
the wizard population size needed.

Nor was classical athens the smallest ever city state.
 
> So I'll take it as certain that 100,000 is enough. But that's more
> than four times 24,000.

But there's enough leeway in all these computations to have 30,000
wizards, and to have that be enough to keep wizarding society afloat.

> 
> Your numbers are well based on the internal evidence, but you may
> have spent more time calculating than Rowling ever did. She writes
> fantasy, not science fiction, and isn't expected to have an entirely
> plausible and consistent world view.
> 

All fiction, including fantasy, should aim for internal consistency.

When the authors fall short, we readers can have a lot of fun
filling in the gaps.

-- 
Robert