_Concerning Holland and the rest of the United Provinces_.
SINCE the close of this paper, it hath been objected from Holland, that
what hath been said of the number of houses and people in London is not
like to be true; for that if it were, then London would be the two-thirds
of the whole Province of Holland. To which is answered, that London is
the two-thirds of all Holland, and more, that province having not
1,044,000 inhabitants (whereof 696,000 is the two-thirds), nor above
800,000, as we have credibly and often heard. For suppose Amsterdam
hath—as we have elsewhere noted—187,000, the seven next great cities at
30,000 each, one with another, 210,000, the ten next at 15,000 each
150,000, the ten smallest at 6,000 each 60,000—in all, the twenty-eight
walled cities and towns of Holland 607,000; in the dorps and villages
193,000, which is about one head for every four acres of land; whereas in
England there is eight acres for every head, without the cities and
market-towns.
Now, suppose London, having 116,000 families, should have seven heads in
each—the medium between MM. Auzout’s and Grant’s reckonings—the total of
the people would be 812,000; or if we reckon that there dies one out of
thirty-four—the medium between thirty and thirty-seven above
mentioned—the total of the people would be thirty-four times 23,212,
viz., 789,208, the medium between which number and the above 812,000 is
800,604, somewhat exceeding 800,000, the supposed number of Holland.
Furthermore, I say that upon former searches into the peopling of the
world, I never found that in any country—not in China itself—there was
more than one man to every English acre of land: many territories passing
for well-peopled where there is but one man for ten such acres. I found
by measuring Holland and West Frisia (_alias_ North Holland) upon the
best maps, that it contained but as many such acres as London doth of
people, viz., about 696,000 acres. I therefore venture to pronounce
(till better informed) that the people of London are as many as those of
Holland, or at least above two-thirds of the same, which is enough to
disable the objection above mentioned; nor is there any need to strain up
London from 696,000 to 800,000, though competent reasons have been given
to that purpose, and though the author of the excellent map of London,
set forth A.D. 1682, reckoned the people thereof (as by the said map
appears) to be 1,200,000, even when he thought the houses of the same to
be but 85,000.