At the time of the Franco-Prussian War the populations of France and what is now Germany were roughly equal, yet by the beginning of World War One France had fallen behind Germany and even Britain. Aside from territorial additions adding to the German Empire’s total, why did France see the larger demographic flattening, and not Britain which was first to industrialize?

[deleted]

[deleted]

I’m reading a book partially on King James and it mentions him having to petition parliament for a “subsidy” in order to fund his parties, navy, etc. How did that system work and where did the money bubble up from? I heard Charles I having to do the same thing so I assume it was an established practice of state to request them? Thanks folks!

I was reading up on how medieval battles were actually fought in a book by John Keegan called "The face of battle". In one of the introductory chapters, he mentions the writings of Julius Caesar on his campaigns in Gaul. Keegan quotes a part in which Caesar reinforces a flank that is on the verge of collapse. He mentions that "some were leaving the battle to join those in the rear ranks who were already making oil."

What was the purpose of the making of oil? I was thinking about setting the baggage train on fire, or even an entire field if possible to minimize the routing? Was it for some other purpose? Please, enlighten me.

edit: Okay, so the first reply made me realize that I forgot a part of my question. I understand the advantages of fire. Why specifically during a retreat? How big is a Roman battlefield, is it better measured in football fields or in miles?

It seems every map I look out excludes Belarus due to lack of data, but why is that the case?

It seems we hear a lot about diseases that Europeans have brought to indigenous peoples (smallpox, influenza, etc) that were devastating to those populations because their immune systems had developed no resistance to these pathogens. It seems this should have worked both ways. Are there any instances where diseases were passed from indigenous peoples to Europeans? Were there any instances in which they were devastating to a European community or society? Are any of these diseases still in existence today?

Specifically I would like to know what kind of board or dice games would have been played, but any other information is welcome.

In the 1990s, Balkan ethnic groups fought brutal wars against each other. In WW2, many fought brutal wars against each other. At the end of WW1... they voluntarily united in one Kingdom, which doesn't seem like the behaviour of people with deep-set ethnic hatreds.

How deep-rooted are ethnic tensions in the Balkans? Are these hatreds purely a post-WW1 development, or did Serbs, Croats, Slovenes and Bosnians not get along in the 19th century, 18th century, 17th century, etc?

Did Catholic Slovenes, Croatians and west Bosnians see each other as enemies in the 12th century? Did Orthodox Albanians, Serbs and east Bosnians in the 16th century look at each other with racism and suspicion?

Or is this purely a development of 19th century nationalism?

If this is mostly a post-WW1 development, what caused it?

So, another damn Red Dead Redemption related question, but I also noticed this in a couple of films like True Grit (1969) and The Searchers.

It seems to frequently come up in dialogue that one character will ask another character what denomination of Christianity they follow, often one of them being Episcopalian or Presbyterian.

Were there conflicts between the various denominations? What implications about a person would be drawn from their denomination?

Was it just because they thought every one was eventually going to fight for independence anyway?

So we know that the Romans copied (almost) everything from the Greeks, who in turn copied (almost) everything from the Phoenicians, who in turn copied (almost) everything from the Egyptians and Mesopotamians, so where/when does the horsehair crest helmet first appear?

Like before theories of light diffraction came up, is there any records of what they thought caused them?

When the Arabs invaded Carthage and succeeded in doing so . They didn’t rebuilt or colonize Carthage but instead chose the nearby Berber city of Tunis and settled there . My question is : why didn’t they chose Carthage ? And even after they settled in Tunis why wasn’t Carthage rebuilt ? The area where once Carthage stood on only started to be inhabited again in the late 20th century under the French . Todays , modern Carthage ( Arabic : قرطاج ) is a Suburb of modern day Tunis , capital of Tunisia .

I’ve always been interested in the British Empire, and was recently talking about it with a friend who claimed the empire was only really useful to Britain in the Great War, but never really at another time. Ignoring any debates over this claim, I was just wondering roughly how did the Empire contribute to Britain’s war effort and was it actually a significant contribution, or could she have managed without the empire?

Kaiser Wilhelm II and King George V were first cousins and presumably had some form of family feelings for one another. Did they every meet after the war to perhaps try and reconcile?