War is bad. We all know that but still easily forget how huge population losses were during past wars. This map shows the population loss in the Holy Roman Empire as a result of the Thirty Years' War (1618-1648). Ouch.
Comments
Log in with your Bluesky account to leave a comment
Not really, some of the areas in the east were low in population before which meant they were completely desolate for decades after while the south west was densely populated and bounced back more quickly here's a map of the German Empire before WW1
Apart from you have to consider population movement and conflict in the 400 years since. It wasn't exactly a very peaceful or static part of the continent
Yes I know. Also the French went through all of the Palatinate area in the centre west again a few decades later, and it’s not easily accessible due to geography. Hence my interest.
I'd say not directly. The orange area from Frankfurt almost to Munich is the richest (and one of the most population-dense) part of Germany now. The ravaging of the German south contributed to the relative rise of Prussia, though, and thus has left its mark on German history.
And, of course, the collective memory of utter impotence in the face of greater powers has led many Germans to prioritize a strong state over individual freedoms up to the 20th century.
The Thirty Years‘ War in Central Europe was really devastating. Whole regions were totally depopulated, most people not killed by the ongoing slaughter died by the bubonic plague but mostly they just starved afterwards. Farms fell in ruins and for long years there was no farming or harvesting…
1/2
…anymore. In a relatively short time of 50 years, though, those regions became re-populated, mostly by immigrants from Austria, the farms/towns were rebuild and regular harvesting began again. There were many wars in Central Europe after this but nothing comparable in destruction until WW1 & 2.
2/2
Comments
So whilst the 30 year's war had an effect, it's like most history in Europe - complicated
1/2
2/2