Which conflict has inflicted the highest casualty rate as a proportion of population?

Question

Read with interest the 'bloodiest war' question and agree that WW2 is in a (tragic) league of its own. Was wondering if there are bigger historical wars that had a bigger impact on the populations sizes of the participants. Possibly this is where WW1 comes into its own but I'm sure there are many others I'm ignorant of.

Answer 1

Although millions died in the First and Second world wars, the casualties as a percentage of total population were not actually particularly high - in comparison with other conflicts, when populations were smaller.

To be honest, it's probably an impossible question to answer, but the Second Punic War must rank quite high - certainly in terms of the manpower losses than Rome suffered during the 16-odd years that Hannibal was running around Italy.

I'd be surprised if the Mongol invasions weren't pretty near the top of the list, if not at the top. When they were marauding through Central Asia, they were known to put entire cities to the sword, man, woman and child, so they must have made a huge dent in some populations.

Answer 2

If you just mean proportion of the population involved then there was a war in 1866 or round about then when Paraguay got its **** handed to it by Brazil and Argentina. Some think 90% of the population of Paraguay ended up dying there.
But then if we're going off that then there have probally been lots of little wars between tribes where one tribe or other is completely wiped out...

If its biggest percentage of the total living population ...Then I'd guess something in ancient China. Maybe you could count the three kingdoms wars as one big war?....Thats the place to look at anyway.

Answer 3

The bulk of what you say is correct. WW1 had more soldier deaths, but WW2 had more civilian deaths. Combine military and civilian from WW2 and you get the biggest loss of life.
However, Stalin in his time in "office" was responsible for the deaths of more people (murdered) than all in WW2. This could be described as the 'bloodiest war' if one takes getting rid of the opposition as an act of war.

Answer 4

The Cambodean Civil War and subsequent Vietnamese invasion resulted in the deaths of over 20% of the 5,000,000 population.

Answer 5

Remember that a lot of folks die of disease during a war, usually recruits brought into training camps with a lot of people from all over the country.

WW2 is the first war where more died of war action than of disease.

Probably WW2 though the US civil war had a pretty high rate, too.

Answer 6

World War I - not just because of numbers, but impact. And the influenza pandemic that followed in its bloody wake. Pol Pot's brutal Khmer Rouge regime in Cambodia killed 2 million people out of a total population of 13 million.

Answer 7

Poiniancy often comes from comedy. Watch the last episode of Blackadder goes forth.
The first world war, and the hierachy that orchestrated it, were obscene.
I cannot say any more on this emotive subject, as of all the things ive seen on the net, this historical event, is truley the most obscene, on so many different levels.

Answer 8

The first world war had tremendous amounts of casualties and I don't think another conflict could even come close to the massive losses that war brought.

Answer 9

1994-95 Rwanda Conflict between the Hutus, and Tutsis resulted in the genocide of roughly 800,000 Tutsis and moderate Hutus in 1994, several 10s of thousands since. 800 K

Answer 10

The Crusades?