There are few things worse in this world than listening to New
Yorkers refer to "The City" -- with the implicit assumption that you
know of which metropolis they speak.
But, according to this amazing chart, these Empire Staters have a
point: New York City is the boss of American cities. Here's the chart,
which tracks the 20 largest U.S. metro areas from 1790 though 2010 (
Click on the chart for a bigger version).
Chart courtesy of Peakbagger.com
Starting in the early 19th century, New York City has been number one and never given up that pole position. (It's the
Kentucky hoops recruiting class of big city populations.)
Philadelphia, too, has been relatively consistent population-wise over
the centuries -- starting at number one in 1790 and standing at number
five in 2010. Los Angeles, which only entered the top 20 metros in 1910,
is now the second largest. Chicago -- President Obama's hometown -- has
risen from the mid-teens in late 1800s all the way to number three in
2010. (Call it the "
Jay Cutler effect.")
Even more intriguing are the metros that have tumbled significantly
over the decades . Follow Detroit's rise and fall and you follow the
rise and fall of the manufacturing industry in America. The Motor City
broke into the top 20 in 1840 and within 100 years was one of the five
largest metro areas in the country. The last three decades have seen a
population free fall in Detroit, however, all the way to the number 12
in 2010.
St. Louis is now barely on the list after
peaking at the fourth most populous metro area in the late
1800s. Baltimore has fallen from top five to barely top twenty. (
Tommy Carcetti weeps.)
And what about the metros that briefly broke into the top 20?
Rochester (N.Y) had a brief run in the mid 1800s. Seattle spent 20
years in the top 20 in the early 20th century before returning in the
1970s and now standing as the 14th largest metropolis. Heck, New Haven
(Conn.) got a little run in the top 20 for two decades in the early
1800s.
Prepare to lose an hour (or three) following the rise and fall of the various cities. And check out the
full explanation of the data behind the chart here.
Historical Metropolitan Populations of the United States
The graph and tables on this page attempt to show how the urban
hierarchy of the United States has developed over time. The statistic
used here is the population of the metropolitan area (contiguous
urbanized area surrounding a central city), not the population of an
individual city. Metropolitan area population is much more useful than
city population as an indicator of the size and importance of a city,
since the official boundaries of a city are usually arbitrary and often
do not include vast suburban areas. For example, in 2000 San Antonio was
the 10th largest city in the U.S., larger than Boston or San Francisco,
but its Metro Area was only ranked about 30th. The same thing was
happening even back in 1790: New York was the biggest single city, but
Philadelphia plus its suburbs of Northern Liberties and Southwark made
it the biggest metro area.
Graph of Metro Area Population Rank over Time
The top 20 Metro Areas in the United States, 1790-2010
Notes on graph: See
tables
below for help on what the various metro area codes mean--most are
fairly self-explanatory. For example "NY" is New York, "Chi" is Chicago,
and so on. Also note that the table graphs rank, not population. A
metro area can see increasing population and decreasing rank at the same
time, if other metro areas are growing faster. Indeed, I think very few
metro areas have lost population during any 10 year span.
Random Notes and Comments
- The urban hierarchy of the U.S. was dominated by the Northeast and
Midwest until relatively recently. Between 1840 and 1900, 18 out of the
top 20 metro areas were in the northeastern quadrant of the current USA,
with just New Orleans, plus either Charleston or San Francisco, as the
only cities in the South or West. As late as 1960, 15 out of 20 were
still outside the "sunbelt".
- For 80 years, from 1860 to 1930 inclusive, New Orleans was the only
southern city in the top 20. Before that, Charleston, SC was the
dominant city of the south, falling off the list in 1850. In 1940,
Houston, Dallas, and Miami began their rises, and Atlanta didn't crack
the top 20 until 1970.
- Cincinnati was the first major city of the Midwest, making the top
20 list in 1820. By 1890 there were 9 midwestern cities in the top 20.
- San Francisco was the only western city in the top 20 for 50 years,
from 1860 to 1900 inclusive. By 1910 Los Angeles cracked the the top 20,
soon overtaking its northern rival. In 2010, the West had more cities
on the list (6) than any other region.
- In 1850, 5 of the top 20 cities were in New York State: New York
City (1), Albany (7), Buffalo (10), Rochester (16), and Syracuse (18).
The nickname "Empire State" was very apt in the heyday of the Erie
Canal.
- Four northeastern cities (New York, Boston, Philadelphia, and
Baltimore) have been in the top 20 since the first census in 1790.
Washington, DC didn't really exist in 1790, but Alexandria, VA was on
the list then, and DC itself afterwards, so one could argue that the
Washington metro area also has been in the top 20 since independence.
- By 1930 Washington, DC was ranked #17, down from #5 in 1820. But the
expansion of the federal government during the New Deal era and World
War II propelled it up to #8 by 1970. It is the only metro area with a
U-shaped curve, with a steady decline in rank followed by a steady rise.
Tables: Top 20 U.S. Metropolitan Areas by Population, 1790-2010
(with top 4 Metropolitan Areas 1680-1775)
Approximate Populations in Thousands
See the section below on
Methodology and Sources for more information as to where these numbers came from.
1680 |
Rank | City | Pop |
1. | Boston | 4.5 |
2. | New York | 3.0 |
3. | Newport, RI | 2.5 |
4. | Charleston | 0.7 |
|
1700 |
Rank | City | Pop |
1. | Boston | 6.7 |
2. | New York | 5.0 |
3. | Philadelphia | 5.0 |
4. | Newport, RI | 2.6 |
|
1720 |
Rank | City | Pop |
1. | Boston | 12 |
2. | Philadelphia | 10 |
3. | New York | 7 |
4. | Newport, RI | 3.8 |
|
1740 |
Rank | City | Pop |
1. | Boston | 16.4 |
2. | Philadelphia | 13.0 |
3. | New York | 11.0 |
4. | Charleston | 6.8 |
|
1760 |
Rank | City | Pop |
1. | Philadelphia | 23.8 |
2. | New York | 18.0 |
3. | Boston | 15.6 |
4. | Charleston | 8.0 |
|
1775 |
Rank | City | Pop |
1. | Philadelphia | 40 |
2. | New York | 25 |
3. | Boston | 16 |
4. | Charleston | 12 |
|
1790 |
Rank | Metro Area | Pop |
1. |
Philadelphia |
44.1 |
2. |
New York |
33.1 |
3. |
Boston |
18.3 |
4. |
Charleston |
16.4 |
5. |
Salem, MA |
13.6 |
6. |
Baltimore |
13.5 |
7. |
Newport, RI |
6.7 |
8. |
Providence |
6.4 |
9. |
Gloucester, MA |
5.3 |
10. |
Newburyport, MA |
4.8 |
11. |
Portsmouth, NH |
4.7 |
12. |
Nantucket |
4.6 |
13. |
Middleborough, MA |
4.5 |
14. |
New Haven |
4.5 |
15. |
Richmond |
3.8 |
16. |
Albany |
3.5 |
17. |
Norfolk |
3.0 |
18. |
Petersburg, VA |
2.8 |
19. |
Alexandria, VA |
2.8 |
20. |
Hartford |
2.7 |
|
1800 |
Rank | Metro Area | Pop |
1. |
Philadelphia |
61.6 |
2. |
New York |
60.5 |
3. |
Baltimore |
26.5 |
4. |
Boston |
24.9 |
5. |
Charleston |
18.8 |
6. |
Salem, MA |
14.7 |
7. |
Washington |
11.2 |
8. |
Providence |
7.6 |
9. |
Norfolk |
6.9 |
10. |
Newport, RI |
6.7 |
11. |
Newburyport, MA |
6.0 |
12. |
Richmond |
5.7 |
13. |
Nantucket |
5.6 |
14. |
Portsmouth, NH |
5.3 |
15. |
Gloucester, MA |
5.3 |
16. |
Schenectady, NY |
5.3 |
17. |
Albany |
5.3 |
18. |
New London, CT |
5.2 |
19. |
Savannah |
5.2 |
20. |
Middleborough, MA |
4.5 |
|
1810 |
Rank | Metro Area | Pop |
1. |
New York |
101 |
2. |
Philadelphia |
87.3 |
3. |
Baltimore |
46.6 |
4. |
Boston |
38.7 |
5. |
Charleston |
24.7 |
6. |
Salem, MA |
23.1 |
7. |
Washington |
20.4 |
8. |
New Orleans |
17.2 |
9. |
Albany |
10.8 |
10. |
Providence |
10.1 |
11. |
Richmond |
9.7 |
12. |
Norfolk |
9.2 |
13. |
Newport, RI |
7.9 |
14. |
Newburyport, MA |
7.6 |
15. |
Portland, ME |
7.2 |
16. |
Portsmouth, NH |
6.9 |
17. |
Nantucket |
6.8 |
18. |
Gloucester, MA |
5.9 |
19. |
Schenectady, NY |
5.9 |
20. |
New Haven |
5.8 |
|
1820 |
Rank | Metro Area | Pop |
1. |
New York |
131 |
2. |
Philadelphia |
109 |
3. |
Baltimore |
62.7 |
4. |
Boston |
54.0 |
5. |
Washington |
28.8 |
6. |
New Orleans |
27.2 |
7. |
Charleston |
24.8 |
8. |
Salem, MA |
22.6 |
9. |
Albany |
17.9 |
10. |
Richmond |
12.1 |
11. |
Providence |
11.8 |
12. |
Cincinnati |
9.6 |
13. |
Portland, ME |
8.6 |
14. |
Norfolk |
8.5 |
15. |
Savannah |
7.5 |
16. |
Portsmouth, NH |
7.3 |
17. |
Newport, RI |
7.3 |
18. |
Nantucket |
7.3 |
19. |
Pittsburgh |
7.3 |
20. |
New Haven |
7.2 |
|
1830 |
Rank | Metro Area | Pop |
1. |
New York |
215 |
2. |
Philadelphia |
161 |
3. |
Boston |
85.6 |
4. |
Baltimore |
80.6 |
5. |
New Orleans |
46.1 |
6. |
Albany |
35.8 |
7. |
Washington |
35.5 |
8. |
Charleston |
30.3 |
9. |
Salem, MA |
27.3 |
10. |
Cincinnati |
24.8 |
11. |
Providence |
22.4 |
12. |
Richmond |
16.1 |
13. |
Pittsburgh |
15.4 |
14. |
Newark |
14.4 |
15. |
Portland, ME |
12.6 |
16. |
Louisville |
10.3 |
17. |
New Haven |
10.2 |
18. |
Norfolk |
9.8 |
19. |
Rochester |
9.2 |
20. |
Buffalo |
8.7 |
|
1840 |
Rank | Metro Area | Pop |
1. |
New York |
374 |
2. |
Philadelphia |
259 |
3. |
Boston |
183 |
4. |
Baltimore |
110 |
5. |
New Orleans |
105 |
6. |
Albany |
72.0 |
7. |
Cincinnati |
54.8 |
8. |
Washington |
50.2 |
9. |
Pittsburgh |
43.7 |
10. |
Charleston |
42.6 |
11. |
Providence |
40.9 |
12. |
Louisville |
34.2 |
13. |
Rochester |
31.4 |
14. |
Newark |
29.8 |
15. |
Buffalo |
29.3 |
16. |
Portland, ME |
28.6 |
17. |
St. Louis |
28.4 |
18. |
New Bedford |
24.1 |
19. |
New Haven |
21.9 |
20. |
Detroit |
21.2 |
|
1850 |
Rank | Metro Area | Pop |
1. |
New York |
650 |
2. |
Philadelphia |
405 |
3. |
Boston |
308 |
4. |
Baltimore |
179 |
5. |
Cincinnati |
133 |
6. |
New Orleans |
123 |
7. |
Albany |
107 |
8. |
St. Louis |
95 |
9. |
Pittsburgh |
86 |
10. |
Buffalo |
80 |
11. |
Washington |
67 |
12. |
Providence |
65 |
13. |
Louisville |
61 |
14. |
Newark |
57 |
15. |
Charleston |
50 |
16. |
Rochester |
49 |
17. |
Chicago |
40 |
18. |
Syracuse |
38 |
19. |
Detroit |
38 |
20. |
Portland, ME |
36 |
|
1860 |
Rank | Metro Area | Pop |
1. |
New York |
1143 |
2. |
Philadelphia |
608 |
3. |
Boston |
374 |
4. |
Baltimore |
221 |
5. |
Cincinnati |
192 |
6. |
St. Louis |
176 |
7. |
New Orleans |
172 |
8. |
Chicago |
123 |
9. |
Albany |
116 |
10. |
Newark |
103 |
11. |
Pittsburgh |
93 |
12. |
Buffalo |
90 |
13. |
Louisville |
88 |
14. |
Washington |
80 |
15. |
Providence |
69 |
16. |
Detroit |
59 |
17. |
San Francisco |
57 |
18. |
Rochester |
56 |
19. |
Cleveland |
49 |
20. |
Milwaukee |
48 |
|
1870 |
Rank | Metro Area | Pop |
1. |
New York |
1687 |
2. |
Philadelphia |
747 |
3. |
Boston |
501 |
4. |
St. Louis |
345 |
5. |
Chicago |
324 |
6. |
Baltimore |
283 |
7. |
Cincinnati |
257 |
8. |
New Orleans |
196 |
9. |
Pittsburgh |
170 |
10. |
Albany |
157 |
11. |
San Francisco |
151 |
12. |
Buffalo |
133 |
13. |
Louisville |
129 |
14. |
Washington |
123 |
15. |
Providence |
101 |
16. |
Detroit |
101 |
17. |
Cleveland |
101 |
18. |
Milwaukee |
75 |
19. |
Rochester |
73 |
20. |
New Haven |
65 |
|
1880 |
Rank | Metro Area | Pop |
1. |
New York |
2234 |
2. |
Philadelphia |
949 |
3. |
Boston |
658 |
4. |
Chicago |
543 |
5. |
St. Louis |
386 |
6. |
Baltimore |
353 |
7. |
Cincinnati |
307 |
8. |
Pittsburgh |
265 |
9. |
San Francisco |
236 |
10. |
New Orleans |
219 |
11. |
Albany |
178 |
12. |
Buffalo |
171 |
13. |
Cleveland |
169 |
14. |
Washington |
164 |
15. |
Detroit |
147 |
16. |
Louisville |
143 |
17. |
Providence |
128 |
18. |
Milwaukee |
121 |
19. |
Rochester |
103 |
20. |
Minneapolis |
94 |
|
1890 |
Rank | Metro Area | Pop |
1. |
New York |
2977 |
2. |
Philadelphia |
1180 |
3. |
Chicago |
1141 |
4. |
Boston |
818 |
5. |
St. Louis |
490 |
6. |
Baltimore |
453 |
7. |
Pittsburgh |
396 |
8. |
Cincinnati |
344 |
9. |
Minneapolis |
305 |
10. |
San Francisco |
302 |
11. |
Cleveland |
274 |
12. |
Buffalo |
272 |
13. |
Washington |
253 |
14. |
New Orleans |
245 |
15. |
Detroit |
237 |
16. |
Milwaukee |
212 |
17. |
Albany |
189 |
18. |
Louisville |
183 |
19. |
Kansas City |
165 |
20. |
Providence |
163 |
|
1900 |
Rank | Metro Area | Pop |
1. |
New York |
4266 |
2. |
Chicago |
1759 |
3. |
Philadelphia |
1454 |
4. |
Boston |
1009 |
5. |
St. Louis |
626 |
6. |
Pittsburgh |
532 |
7. |
Baltimore |
532 |
8. |
Cleveland |
396 |
9. |
Cincinnati |
379 |
10. |
San Francisco |
375 |
11. |
Minneapolis |
374 |
12. |
Buffalo |
373 |
13. |
Detroit |
321 |
14. |
Washington |
302 |
15. |
Milwaukee |
296 |
16. |
New Orleans |
291 |
17. |
Providence |
243 |
18. |
Kansas City |
242 |
19. |
Louisville |
227 |
20. |
Albany |
188 |
|
1910 |
Rank | Metro Area | Pop |
1. |
New York |
6021 |
2. |
Chicago |
2283 |
3. |
Philadelphia |
1746 |
4. |
Boston |
1213 |
5. |
St. Louis |
760 |
6. |
Pittsburgh |
655 |
7. |
San Francisco |
604 |
8. |
Baltimore |
589 |
9. |
Cleveland |
580 |
10. |
Minneapolis |
526 |
11. |
Detroit |
503 |
12. |
Cincinnati |
425 |
13. |
Buffalo |
420 |
14. |
Milwaukee |
389 |
15. |
Los Angeles |
374 |
16. |
Kansas City |
357 |
17. |
Washington |
357 |
18. |
New Orleans |
344 |
19. |
Albany |
283 |
20. |
Providence |
274 |
|
1920 |
Rank | Metro Area | Pop |
1. |
New York |
7041 |
2. |
Chicago |
2859 |
3. |
Philadelphia |
2072 |
4. |
Boston |
1366 |
5. |
Detroit |
1071 |
6. |
St. Louis |
859 |
7. |
Cleveland |
834 |
8. |
Pittsburgh |
775 |
9. |
San Francisco |
771 |
10. |
Baltimore |
753 |
11. |
Los Angeles |
682 |
12. |
Minneapolis |
626 |
13. |
Buffalo |
539 |
14. |
Milwaukee |
478 |
15. |
Cincinnati |
470 |
16. |
Washington |
467 |
17. |
Kansas City |
455 |
18. |
New Orleans |
393 |
19. |
Seattle |
334 |
20. |
Indianapolis |
323 |
|
1930 |
Rank | Metro Area | Pop |
1. |
New York |
8667 |
2. |
Chicago |
3718 |
3. |
Philadelphia |
2264 |
4. |
Detroit |
1721 |
5. |
Los Angeles |
1617 |
6. |
Boston |
1479 |
7. |
San Francisco |
996 |
8. |
Cleveland |
976 |
9. |
Pittsburgh |
960 |
10. |
St. Louis |
950 |
11. |
Baltimore |
836 |
12. |
Minneapolis |
753 |
13. |
Buffalo |
620 |
14. |
Milwaukee |
615 |
15. |
Cincinnati |
580 |
16. |
Kansas City |
561 |
17. |
Washington |
527 |
18. |
New Orleans |
469 |
19. |
Seattle |
390 |
20. |
Indianapolis |
379 |
|
1940 |
Rank | Metro Area | Pop |
1. |
New York |
10135 |
2. |
Chicago |
4210 |
3. |
Philadelphia |
2538 |
4. |
Los Angeles |
2268 |
5. |
Detroit |
2041 |
6. |
Boston |
1746 |
7. |
San Francisco |
1156 |
8. |
Pittsburgh |
1134 |
9. |
St. Louis |
1102 |
10. |
Cleveland |
1079 |
11. |
Baltimore |
992 |
12. |
Minneapolis |
886 |
13. |
Washington |
800 |
14. |
Buffalo |
708 |
15. |
Milwaukee |
705 |
16. |
Kansas City |
632 |
17. |
Cincinnati |
559 |
18. |
New Orleans |
557 |
19. |
Houston |
471 |
20. |
Seattle |
451 |
|
1950 |
Rank | Metro Area | Pop |
1. |
New York |
12604 |
2. |
Chicago |
5208 |
3. |
Los Angeles |
4250 |
4. |
Philadelphia |
3297 |
5. |
Detroit |
2884 |
6. |
Boston |
2301 |
7. |
San Francisco |
2131 |
8. |
St. Louis |
1541 |
9. |
Cleveland |
1425 |
10. |
Pittsburgh |
1400 |
11. |
Washington |
1287 |
12. |
Baltimore |
1162 |
13. |
Minneapolis |
987 |
14. |
Buffalo |
895 |
15. |
Dallas |
855 |
16. |
Milwaukee |
829 |
17. |
Cincinnati |
813 |
18. |
Houston |
701 |
19. |
Kansas City |
698 |
20. |
New Orleans |
660 |
|
1960 |
Rank | Metro Area | Pop |
1. |
New York |
14437 |
2. |
Los Angeles |
6805 |
3. |
Chicago |
6377 |
4. |
Philadelphia |
3989 |
5. |
Detroit |
3750 |
6. |
San Francisco |
2607 |
7. |
Boston |
2501 |
8. |
Pittsburgh |
2105 |
9. |
Washington |
1905 |
10. |
St. Louis |
1864 |
11. |
Cleveland |
1785 |
12. |
Dallas |
1435 |
13. |
Baltimore |
1419 |
14. |
Minneapolis |
1377 |
15. |
Miami |
1173 |
16. |
Milwaukee |
1150 |
17. |
Houston |
1140 |
18. |
Buffalo |
1054 |
19. |
Cincinnati |
994 |
20. |
Kansas City |
921 |
|
1970 |
Rank | Metro Area | Pop |
1. |
New York |
16193 |
2. |
Los Angeles |
7984 |
3. |
Chicago |
7164 |
4. |
Philadelphia |
4419 |
5. |
Detroit |
4085 |
6. |
San Francisco |
3049 |
7. |
Boston |
2703 |
8. |
Washington |
2671 |
9. |
Pittsburgh |
2124 |
10. |
St. Louis |
2123 |
11. |
Dallas |
2016 |
12. |
Cleveland |
1960 |
13. |
Miami |
1834 |
14. |
Minneapolis |
1701 |
15. |
Houston |
1678 |
16. |
Baltimore |
1580 |
17. |
Milwaukee |
1252 |
18. |
Seattle |
1238 |
19. |
San Diego |
1198 |
20. |
Atlanta |
1172 |
|
1980 |
Rank | Metro Area | Pop |
1. |
New York |
16500 |
2. |
Los Angeles |
10841 |
3. |
Chicago |
7325 |
4. |
Philadelphia |
4830 |
5. |
Detroit |
4214 |
6. |
San Francisco |
4185 |
7. |
Boston |
3064 |
8. |
Washington |
2912 |
9. |
Houston |
2757 |
10. |
Dallas |
2713 |
11. |
Miami |
2616 |
12. |
St. Louis |
1849 |
13. |
Pittsburgh |
1810 |
14. |
Minneapolis |
1788 |
15. |
Baltimore |
1755 |
16. |
Cleveland |
1752 |
17. |
San Diego |
1704 |
18. |
Atlanta |
1613 |
19. |
Phoenix |
1409 |
20. |
Seattle |
1392 |
|
1990 |
Rank | Metro Area | Pop |
1. |
New York |
16754 |
2. |
Los Angeles |
13522 |
3. |
Chicago |
7373 |
4. |
San Francisco |
5386 |
5. |
Philadelphia |
4970 |
6. |
Miami |
3948 |
7. |
Detroit |
3698 |
8. |
Washington |
3363 |
9. |
Boston |
3355 |
10. |
Dallas |
3265 |
11. |
Houston |
3088 |
12. |
Seattle |
2354 |
13. |
San Diego |
2348 |
14. |
Atlanta |
2158 |
15. |
Minneapolis |
2080 |
16. |
Phoenix |
2006 |
17. |
St. Louis |
1947 |
18. |
Baltimore |
1890 |
19. |
Pittsburgh |
1744 |
20. |
Tampa |
1709 |
|
2000 |
Rank | Metro Area | Pop |
1. |
New York |
18689 |
2. |
Los Angeles |
14661 |
3. |
Chicago |
8419 |
4. |
San Francisco |
5973 |
5. |
Philadelphia |
5418 |
6. |
Miami |
4919 |
7. |
Dallas |
4445 |
8. |
Houston |
4063 |
9. |
Boston |
4032 |
10. |
Washington |
3934 |
11. |
Detroit |
3903 |
12. |
Atlanta |
3500 |
13. |
Seattle |
3018 |
14. |
Phoenix |
2975 |
15. |
San Diego |
2674 |
16. |
Minneapolis |
2389 |
17. |
Baltimore |
2251 |
18. |
Denver |
2231 |
19. |
St. Louis |
2078 |
20. |
Tampa |
2062 |
|
2010 |
Rank | Metro Area | Pop |
1. |
New York |
20009 |
2. |
Los Angeles |
15750 |
3. |
Chicago |
9023 |
4. |
San Francisco |
6828 |
5. |
Philadelphia |
6003 |
6. |
Dallas |
5685 |
7. |
Miami |
5513 |
8. |
Houston |
5382 |
9. |
Atlanta |
4743 |
10. |
Washington |
4697 |
11. |
Boston |
4407 |
12. |
Detroit |
4160 |
13. |
Phoenix |
3863 |
14. |
Seattle |
3446 |
15. |
San Diego |
2985 |
16. |
Denver |
2716 |
17. |
Minneapolis |
2651 |
18. |
Baltimore |
2497 |
19. |
Tampa |
2442 |
20. |
St. Louis |
2246 |
|
|
Peak Years for Cities that have Declined in Rank
The following table of metro areas shows ones that have declined in rank and are
not likely to ever reach their past high ranking again. If a metro area had its
high ranking for more than one year, then the latest year is selected.
Metro Area |
High Rank Year |
High Rank |
Boston |
1740 |
1 |
Charleston |
1790 |
4 |
Philadelphia |
1800 |
1 |
Providence |
1800 |
8 |
Norfolk |
1800 |
9 |
Baltimore |
1820 |
3 |
Richmond |
1820 |
10 |
Portland, ME |
1820 |
13 |
New Haven |
1830 |
17 |
New Orleans |
1840 |
5 |
Albany |
1840 |
6 |
|
Metro Area |
High Rank Year |
High Rank |
Louisville |
1840 |
12 |
Rochester |
1840 |
13 |
Buffalo |
1850 |
10 |
Cincinnati |
1860 |
5 |
St. Louis |
1870 |
4 |
Minneapolis |
1890 |
9 |
Pittsburgh |
1910 |
6 |
Cleveland |
1920 |
7 |
Detroit |
1930 |
4 |
Milwaukee |
1930 |
14 |
Chicago |
1950 |
2 |
|
If you live in any of these metro areas, it might be interesting to
see when your home town was at it's peak--for example, if you now live
in St. Louis, you can imagine a time (1870) when your city was the 4th
most-populous urban center in the country. Of course, "not likely to
reach past high ranking" does not mean impossbile, but I think most
would agree that no one expects to see Charleston, SC as the 4th largest
metro area in the US anytime soon.
This list is sorted chronologically, and note that the first part of
the list is dominated by East Coast cities, and the last part by metro
areas in the Midwest. No cities in the West are on the list. Sunbelt
metro areas have all been growing quickly in recent decades and at this
point I don't think we can say that any have clearly peaked in their
ranking.
Methodology and Sources
There is no consistent, long-standing, precise standard for
metropolitan area definition in the United States. Prior to 1950, the
U.S. census bureau didn't even have the concept. Since then, various
kinds of metro areas (SMSAs, MSAs, CMSAs, etc.) have been defined by the
federal OMB, but they are mostly based on entire counties and their
definitions have fluctuated. More useful is the Urbanized Area, defined
as contiguous land above a certain population density, but they, too,
have only been tracked in the past few decades.
Complicating matters is determining exactly where the metro area
boundaries fall and what cities should be included. For example, I list
Newark as the 10th largest city in the US in 1860, but in 1870 it is
(somewhat arbitraily) included as part of the New York metro area, so it
falls off the chart. Salem and Boston have a simliar pattern. In
general, though, I have lumped together cities like Minneapolis-St.
Paul, Dallas-Fort Worth, Miami-Fort Lauderdale, San Francisco-Oakland,
and others. A large rise in population over a ten-year period could be
attributed to a city "capturing" the urban are of a neighboring city
during that time.
Six main sources for population data were used:
I first took all the city population data from source #1 and assigned
suburban places to central cities, for example, Oakland to San
Francisco or Newark to New York (as appropriate by year). Then I was
able to get a total population of all cities (in the national top 100)
for a metro area for a given year. For 1790 to 1830, there were fewer
than 100 total cities in the nation, so these totals were used
exclusively for those years in the charts above.
For 1840 to 1940, I used the county data from source #3 and assigned
counties to central cities (again, as appropriate by year), and to get a
metro area population, I took the total of the cities listed in the top
100 and added a portion of the population in the surrounding counties. I
used a figure ranging from about 25% in 1840 up to about 50% in 1940.
This means that the 1900 population of the Cleveland metro area was
obtained by taking the population of Cleveland and adding to it a
percentage of the population of Cuyahoga county.
For 1950-2010 I generally used urbanized area populations (source #2)
as much as possible, doing some combinations of urbanized areas that
the census bureau did not do (for example, San Jose added to the San
Francisco-Oakland urbanized area). I checked this agains source #4, the
metro area populations, for a sanity check.
Once I had all this, I went through and "smoothed out" the numbers a
bit to avoid jarring ups and downs in rank for certain cities. I also
compared my rankings against source #6 noted above, and made sure my
numbers were within 2 ranking spots of theirs, and, if not, adjusting
accordingly.
The Colonial Era top 4 lists were mainly from source #5 above, but
cross-checked for sanity with other writings about early American
cities. There are some population numbers that are widely quoted for
New York, Boston, and Philadelphia that are clearly at odds with most
sources, and they have been ignored. No attempt was made to add any
suburban populations for the 1680-1775 period, so, for example, the 2000
people in Brooklyn in 1720 are not included in the New York population.
At that time, the concept of a metropolitan area was simply not
applicable, so simple city populations were used.
The end results are, at best, educated wild guesses. This is not a
serious academic reseach project and my methodology would not hold up to
peer-review scrutiny. This means that no number above should be
considered 100% accurate, and most city rankings are within plus or
minus 2 slots, at best. There are simply too many judgement calls that
went into the methodology--which cities were part of which metro areas,
what percentage of a county's population was urban, what counties are
part of which metro areas, and so on. But I think it does give a
reasonably accurate big-picture view of the changing fortunes in
America's urban landscape.
No comments:
Post a Comment