View previous topic | View next topic

Geography and our Global community

Page 1 of 6
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

CB27
453104.  Mon Dec 08, 2008 12:04 pm Reply with quote

This could possibly be another topic for one of the chapters, so here goes:

Q. If I were to tell you that Delhi in India has a population that is currently between 12m - 17m (the higher estimates are including the metro area), where in the list of most populated capital cities would you expect to find it.

Klaxon for pretty much any number.

A. The capital city of India is New Delhi, and not Delhi, and the surprising fact is that New Delhi has a population of just over 300k, much smaller than most capital cities and less than a 20th the size of London.

 
mckeonj
453125.  Mon Dec 08, 2008 12:57 pm Reply with quote

In my youth, that was roughly the case for London; the resident population of the City of London in about 1950 was about 20,000. (from memory - I will try to get the true figure).
One night in 1953 I walked through the City at night, all the buildings were dark, and all I could hear was the echo of my footsteps. Very creepy.

 
Davini994
453128.  Mon Dec 08, 2008 1:39 pm Reply with quote

It's a bit of a cheeky one though CB, seeing as 'old' Delhi and New Delhi are contiguous. It would be similar to saying the population of London is the City of London, although this is off the top of my head so I may be completely wrong.

 
suze
453206.  Mon Dec 08, 2008 4:46 pm Reply with quote

You are not wrong though - New Delhi is indeed an area within the greater metropolis which is Delhi.

And actually, I've heard it claimed before now that if we apply the same sort of thinking to the UK, then the capital is Westminster rather than London. After all, the official residence of the sovereign and the seat of government both lie within the City of Westminster.


As for just what is the world's most populated capital city, that's actually slightly tricky to answer. As so often it comes down to definitions, but so far as we can tell the capital city which has the most people living within the designated city limits is Seoul in South Korea. The official figure for its population as at the end of 2007 was 10,421,782.

 
Sadurian Mike
453210.  Mon Dec 08, 2008 4:59 pm Reply with quote

Sam and Dave came from the capital of South Korea, you know.



Altogether now,
#"I'm a Seoul man...."

 
CB27
453223.  Mon Dec 08, 2008 5:49 pm Reply with quote

The way I understood it New Delhi is the official capital of India and is therefore to be regarded separately from Delhi itself, though it is an area which is part of Delhi's metropolis.

The capital of the UK is not the City of London, but rather it is London itself, so if counted as a metropolis it can even be as big as 13 million.

In those terms the most populous capital city in the world would then be Tokyo, with a population exceeding 35m (source)

 
CB27
453231.  Mon Dec 08, 2008 6:17 pm Reply with quote

OK, another naughty one.

Q. Which US President succeeded in ensuring Britain had no more control over any lands in mainland US? (I put mainland in case any smartass comes up with places like Diego Garcia or suchlike).

Klaxon would be for Washington or various others.

The answer would be James K Polk, who signed the Oregon Treaty of 1846, creating the border along the 49th parallel and ensuring the US now possessed lands which would later become the states of Washington, Oregon, and Idaho, and parts of the states of Montana and Wyoming.

 
Sadurian Mike
453232.  Mon Dec 08, 2008 6:21 pm Reply with quote

Of course, presumably before the Treaty they weren't part of the US anyway.

 
suze
453242.  Mon Dec 08, 2008 7:08 pm Reply with quote

The US thought that they were - the Oregon Country had been disputed ever since a treaty of 1818 which only defined the border as being the 49th parallel east of the Rockies. West of the Rockies was something of a no-man's-land, and both countries laid claim to it.

Eventually the Oregon Treaty of 1846 settled the border as being the 49th parallel right up to the Pacific shore, although Britain and hence Canada got all of Vancouver Island (some of which is south of the 49th). The Americans had wanted more, but were having a little local difficulty with the Mexicans and ultimately accepted what Britain had made clear was its best and final offer.

The 49th had been America's first offer but Britain had rejected it, at which point the Americans hardened their stance and sought everything west of the Rockies up to 54° 40'. But common sense ultimately prevailed. A thing about which I am very glad indeed, since I'd then have been an American ...

The Oregon Treaty got a mention on University Challenge this evening. Was that perhaps what led CB to his posting?


Quite apart from Vancouver Island and some islands in the Great Lakes, some of the main Canadian landmass does lie south of the 49th - the border is determined differently east of Lake of the Woods. Indeed, more than half of Canada's population lives south of the 49th, since Toronto and Montréal and their surrounding suburbia are there.

Two other anomalies worth a quick mention. Nineteenth century cartography wasn't always especially accurate, and hence the border is about 200 yards north of where it "should" be for quite a lot of the way. There's a particularly glaring error near Lake of the Woods, the so-called North West Angle.

And then there is Point Roberts WA. This is a promontory about 20 miles south of Vancouver which lies just south of the 49th. Consequently, about five square miles of land with a population of 1,500 or so is in the USA, but reachable only via Canada.

The US would never admit it, but it wouldn't get especially upset if Point Roberts expressed a wish to secede to Canada - its existence causes all manner of logistical problems to the US in terms of mail, schools, and so on. Such a wish was actually expressed back in the 1940s, but the people of Point Roberts decided not to pursue it at that time.

 
bobwilson
453275.  Mon Dec 08, 2008 10:21 pm Reply with quote

Quote:
And then there is Point Roberts WA. This is a promontory about 20 miles south of Vancouver which lies just south of the 49th. Consequently, about five square miles of land with a population of 1,500 or so is in the USA, but reachable only via Canada.

The US would never admit it, but it wouldn't get especially upset if Point Roberts expressed a wish to secede to Canada - its existence causes all manner of logistical problems to the US in terms of mail, schools, and so on. Such a wish was actually expressed back in the 1940s, but the people of Point Roberts decided not to pursue it at that time.


Sounds like smugglers paradise to me

 
CB27
453418.  Tue Dec 09, 2008 6:25 am Reply with quote

You're right suze, it was because of the mention on university challenge, I knew about the British, Mexican and French acquisitions, though I was surprised about the Spanish one.

 
samivel
453979.  Tue Dec 09, 2008 11:27 pm Reply with quote

That's because nobody expects the Spanish Acquisition.

 
Lukecash
453988.  Wed Dec 10, 2008 1:33 am Reply with quote

suze wrote:
The Americans had wanted more, but were having a little local difficulty with the Mexicans and ultimately accepted what Britain had made clear was its best and final offer.


No, actually the Mexicans weren't causing us problems. We were causing THEM problems. Polk was very aggressive in land grab and started a land grab. The only way they caused us problems was by actually beating us back from Mexico City. Otherwise we took the entire Southwest.

Strangely enough, a man from Illinois was vocal against the war. His friends told him that he was ending his political career. That man was Abraham Lincoln.

 
Lukecash
453992.  Wed Dec 10, 2008 2:03 am Reply with quote

Actually, while I'm here... Let me throw out a QI:

What Can You Tell Me about the State of Franklin?

Klaxon for "He's Dead"

After the Revolutionary war, many states were asked to help pay for the war effort. Since taxation was seen as too harsh, North Carolina was going to offer up its westerly lands as form of payment.

The people who lived there were quite supportive of the idea: They were in a frontier area and had trouble with the Native Americans and outlaws. After being ignored by North Carolina Government, they thought they could organize a government that would answer to their needs. So a few western counties agreed to become a Federal Territory. Thus the state of Franklin was born in 1784.

They wrote up a government . As one historian wrote "Office holders could not be any person "if he were immoral, a Sabbath breaker, a clergyman, a doctor or a lawyer.""

Except North Carolina changed it's mind. They eventually set out to arrest the Govenor John Sevier. He was eventually captured, but made a daring escape out of a second story courthouse window onto a waiting horse.

In 1888-North Carolina was given back the counties on the condition they pardoned all the leaders of Franklin. John Sevier then became a Senator in North Carolina- Then in 1897 North Carolina gave up those western territories to the new state of Tennessee. To which John Sevier became a Governor.

So for four years, there was a State of Franklin in the U.S.

 
Celebaelin
454087.  Wed Dec 10, 2008 6:15 am Reply with quote

samivel wrote:
That's because nobody expects the Spanish Acquisition.

Marvellous. *applauds enthusiastically*

 

Page 1 of 6
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

All times are GMT - 5 Hours


Display posts from previous:   

Search Search Forums

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group