General History Questions thread

Users who are viewing this thread

Were there any measures taken by certain governments like after a war or plague that would help rebuild the needed population in most depopulated regions of a country? I have heard that HRE made special laws to help the population to rebuild itself after the thirty years war, but I don't really know if i'm correct.
 
After the First Crusade there were calls by various elements of the government, the church and the intelligentsia to repopulate Jerusalem. It was a generally depopulated region anyway and the crusader states had chronic issues with soldiers returning home immediately after the war. It seems to have worked and some migrants complained that they didn't make much money in the "land of milk and honey".
 
The Inca Empire would frequently use the mitma policy to move populations into depopulated/underpopulated areas to increase their productivity, or otherwise depopulate them of resisting ethnic groups to other areas and move loyal mitmaqkuna to resettle the region. Both an economic move and a political one to secure and prosper the empire.
 
Almalexia said:
The Inca Empire would frequently use the mitma policy to move populations into depopulated/underpopulated areas to increase their productivity, or otherwise depopulate them of resisting ethnic groups to other areas and move loyal mitmaqkuna to resettle the region. Both an economic move and a political one to secure and prosper the empire.
Kentucky James said:
After the First Crusade there were calls by various elements of the government, the church and the intelligentsia to repopulate Jerusalem. It was a generally depopulated region anyway and the crusader states had chronic issues with soldiers returning home immediately after the war. It seems to have worked and some migrants complained that they didn't make much money in the "land of milk and honey".

But what about Europe?  I'm curious about how it happened in Europe lets say after wars before WW I.
Thanks for the info tho!  :grin:
 
Well if you wanted Europe specifically you could have just said so. I'll leave that to someone with more expertise in the area, though the Greco-Roman colony system likely applied.
 
Almalexia said:
Well if you wanted Europe specifically you could have just said so. I'll leave that to someone with more expertise in the area, though the Greco-Roman colony system likely applied.
Everything is good, I like all kinds of info on this topic  :smile:
The Inca system is interesting considering that they were very advanced than we thought.
If anybody has more information on this topic, I would like to know about more cultures and continents and how they dealt with this kind of thing.
 
BerserkerRezo said:
Were there any measures taken by certain governments like after a war or plague that would help rebuild the needed population in most depopulated regions of a country? I have heard that HRE made special laws to help the population to rebuild itself after the thirty years war, but I don't really know if i'm correct.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ostsiedlung
 
BerserkerRezo said:
Were there any measures taken by certain governments like after a war or plague that would help rebuild the needed population in most depopulated regions of a country?
Spanish reconquista, with most muslims running away. The Carta-Puebla (Town Charter) was a frequently used juridical instrument. The chapter generated the optimum conditions for the cession of lands and plots for installing new settlers
http://www.raco.cat/index.php/ImagoTemporis/article/viewFile/208810/285437 section 4.2
In short, "here, take these lands and cultivate this and that, low or no taxes for the first year or two". All you need is some economic incentive and people will come.
 
for any indian historia or any historian out there

is there a source, or images, or bunch of reference image as to how indian soldier around chola's reign are dressed? or any indian soldier around 6-10 centuries

i only found statues and relief and.. im not sure if the soldier are really dressed like that. crazy luxuruous or just wearing a skirt
 
My uneducated guess is that the two biggest reasons were:
1. Mobility
The mongol empire was pretty big and the mongols were nomadic people. Carrying around some extra 50 or so kilos for very long distances would have been pretty exhausting for both rider and horse.
Mobility was also important in battle. The horse archer warfare includes riding around the enemy outside polearm distance. They do lot of quick maneuvers, sudden direction changes, faking retreats and whatnot. If your fighting style is based on mobility, inertia (and thus extra weight) is not your friend.

2.Availiblity
As I said (and pretty much everyone knows), they were nomadic people. Nomadic life is not the best for metalworking. Both ore mines and forges are pretty immobile stuff, and if your people spends most of the year far away from those, you won't be drowning in steel wares. Leatherworking doesn't have such restrictions, it can be done pretty much anywhere. And thanks to the herds that supported their nomadic life, leather was easily available to the mongols.
 
Again, I can just guess, as I never did put on any kind of armour. My guess is that it depends on the particular type armour. How many pieces it consists of, how much padding and undergarment it needs, etc. For example, a simple metal cuirass with its few straps must be easier and quicker to put on than some complex, multi-piece leather armour. As far as I know, mails aren't that hard to put on either (pull it on, put on belt, done). But we all heard about the full plates that need team effort to get put on the wearer.
I'm sure there are more knowlegeable people around who even have first handed experience in wearing armour, but you can have a decent idea about the topic with the use of common sense. Like, if it's practically a big coat with some metal or leather sewn on it (or a big coat made of metal or leather), then it should be easy to put on, if it has more pieces than a Lego castle, it should take some time to get it battle ready.
 
kalashnjkov said:
Why do the mongol prefer to use lamellar, leather armor over chainmail and plate armor?

The Mongols inherited the use of lamellar from the Chinese, as with most of the rest of their armour. Prior to the fall of the Song dynasty it's evident that east/central asian nomads would have stolen/bought most of their armour from China. For example, silk undercoats were common armour for horse archers, and there was no silk production in central asia at that time. Furthermore the Song dynasty had a professional army with standardised mass-produced equipment, and would have had immense numbers of modular lamellar outfits that were designed to be adjusted in size. It's extremely unlikely that steppe nomads could produce lamellar or chainmail on their own, but given the abundance of lamellar in the region it only made sense to use it.

Lamellar is also a lot better at arrow deflection rather than absorbtion, and the mongols would have encountered lots of arrows. If you're wearing chainmail and you get shot in the chest with an arrow, you probably won't die. But you'll have a barbed arrow sticking out of you. Primary sources during the crusades tell of chainmail armed horsemen who were almost unable to move because of how many arrows would be stuck in them. The advantage of lamellar was a much lower chance that an arrow would get stuck. The gigantic pauldrons on lamellar also act like small shields for protecting the face when the arms are raised, which tends to favour horse archers more than chainmail does.
 
Back
Top Bottom