|
3peat posted:Gas prices Seeing that the price at the pump in Finland is currently 1,6 EUR per litre this chart is missing something.
|
#
?
May 18, 2013 09:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 18:59 |
|
|
uncleTomOfFinland posted:Seeing that the price at the pump in Finland is currently 1,6 EUR per litre this chart is missing something. I think it says down there that they listed prices without taxes applied to them.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2013 09:07
|
|
|
Showing that map without taxes as well is kinda useless.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2013 09:29
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:So uh, people do nothing but drink in Wisconsin and Illinois? What exactly do people do in other places? Where do you socialize?
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2013 03:30
|
|
|
I made a new Europe.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2013 04:48
|
|
|
Kingsbury3 posted:I made a new Europe. Is this actually based on something or just random countries cut out?
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2013 05:28
|
|
|
Skeleton Jelly posted:Is this actually based on something or just random countries cut out? CERN+Russia basically the roman empire+german factories (rhine) other countries kept out for sporting purposes.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2013 05:30
|
|
|
Kingsbury just really, really hates Finland. In all seriousness, I'm trying to find a pattern and it's driving me crazy.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2013 05:30
|
|
|
Phlegmish posted:Kingsbury just really, really hates Finland. roman empire controls the red habsburgs control other. basically total unification. finland is taken out for goalkeeping purposes.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2013 05:31
|
|
|
The spread of the Black Death in Europe, by year:
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2013 07:53
|
|
|
DrProsek posted:The spread of the Black Death in Europe, by year: The Black Death is such a creepy thing. Even moreso that it wasn't alone. The Plague of Justinian in the 6th century might have been as deadly a plague outbreak, just it's got a lot less documentation. And its timing was critical too: had it not happened the Roman Empire was in a great position to reunite and reestablish itself in Western Europe, which would have been a hugely different history.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2013 08:15
|
|
|
DrProsek posted:The spread of the Black Death in Europe, by year: Why is Poland just a plagueless hole?
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2013 08:31
|
|
Amarkov posted:Why is Poland just a plagueless hole? Where is the historical data indicating a presence of the Black Death in the Kola Peninsula?
|
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2013 08:44
|
|
|
Killer robot posted:The Black Death is such a creepy thing. Even moreso that it wasn't alone. The Plague of Justinian in the 6th century might have been as deadly a plague outbreak, just it's got a lot less documentation. And its timing was critical too: had it not happened the Roman Empire was in a great position to reunite and reestablish itself in Western Europe, which would have been a hugely different history. The black death and subsequent outbreaks taught Europeans a very important thing: quarantine. Board up the homes of infected families and burn it all to the ground - extremely brutal but effective since there was no treatment available. In the Americas, infectious diseases did not exist to a European extent. So, none of the native peoples were familiar with plagues and how to deal with it: quarantine. When plagues swept through the Americas after the Spanish made landfall, many natives would gather around the sick to pray/treat their disease, thus spreading the plague even faster.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2013 09:35
|
|
|
Killer robot posted:The Black Death is such a creepy thing. Even moreso that it wasn't alone. The Plague of Justinian in the 6th century might have been as deadly a plague outbreak, just it's got a lot less documentation. And its timing was critical too: had it not happened the Roman Empire was in a great position to reunite and reestablish itself in Western Europe, which would have been a hugely different history. Wasn't the Black Death one of the reasons for increasing urbanization in Europe, with all the economic/scientific/political then leading to the Renaissance (plus Byzantine refugees converging in Italy)?
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2013 12:52
|
|
|
That doesn't make sense. Why should more people stream into the cities when you need them farming the land for food?
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2013 16:36
|
|
|
Torrannor posted:Wasn't the Black Death one of the reasons for increasing urbanization in Europe, with all the economic/scientific/political then leading to the Renaissance (plus Byzantine refugees converging in Italy)? If the Black Death had an effect on urbanisation, it would have reduced it because people living closely together in large towns would have been most severely effected. Your best odds of surviving the plague would have been to hide in a remote village and only eat local food and drink water from a local river that was not downriver from any major towns. Amarkov posted:Why is Poland just a plagueless hole? As I understand, Poland's immunity from the plague came from; 1) Poland was not a major trade center, due to not owning a coast by the 1400s, and because it had no urgent need for resources that were not available locally, so closing its borders basically meant business as usual. 2) Poland had a large Jewish community and accepted Jewish refugees who were scapegoated by other nations during the plague. And because of that large population, Poles embraced a tradition that was common among Jews at the time but not most other Europeans; regular bathing. As for Milan and Andora, Milan survived via quarantine and burning down the homes of any plague victims, and Andora was a secluded mountainous region that saw little travel to begin with. NewtGoongrich posted:Where is the historical data indicating a presence of the Black Death in the Kola Peninsula? Yeah that's something that makes me dubious of the map's accuracy. The Kola Peninsula was sparsely populated enough that any outbreaks there, even if they were well recorded, wouldn't have spread at the same rate as it did in the rest of Europe.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2013 17:01
|
|
|
Torrannor posted:Wasn't the Black Death one of the reasons for increasing urbanization in Europe, with all the economic/scientific/political then leading to the Renaissance (plus Byzantine refugees converging in Italy)? The black death was responsible for a substantial increase in wages for the average farmer/laborer, and it did lead to a kind of Golden Age of peasant festivals and holidays (we have church records limiting holidays too 1/3rd of the year because people were feasting so often). Overall though, it probably decreased urban population but put nobles on uncomfortable footing and led to a rise in burgher wealth as well; which are pretty important things for the Renaissance.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2013 17:01
|
|
|
Say why was Milan untouched by the plague?
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2013 18:02
|
|
|
Riso posted:Say why was Milan untouched by the plague? Two posts above you, man. I think the map just saw that Stockholm and Moscow got the plague in the same year, went "eh, gently caress it" and filled in the rest of the north. 
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2013 18:08
|
|
|
Torrannor posted:Wasn't the Black Death one of the reasons for increasing urbanization in Europe, with all the economic/scientific/political then leading to the Renaissance (plus Byzantine refugees converging in Italy)? One of the factors behind this was the massive loss of life in farming communities: the sudden loss of labour supply basically pushed up wages and made it harder to control mobility (previously, and later as the system recovered, peasants were bound to their land with severe limitations on movement, even in the most permissive regimes). If you wanted to leave the countryside, this was one of those windows where you actually could, and where the owner of the new lands you were on was less inclined to 'return' you, as he was in need of labour.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2013 18:23
|
|
|
DrProsek posted:If the Black Death had an effect on urbanisation, it would have reduced it because people living closely together in large towns would have been most severely effected. Your best odds of surviving the plague would have been to hide in a remote village and only eat local food and drink water from a local river that was not downriver from any major towns. I really need to track down an accessible book of Polish history.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2013 17:06
|
|
|
Yeah, the reason I've heard was the large Jewish population in Poland, and their regular bathing.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2013 17:08
|
|
|
VogeGandire posted:Yeah, the reason I've heard was the large Jewish population in Poland, and their regular bathing. This explains so much of modern antisemites. "drat Jews and their general tidiness" 
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2013 18:03
|
|
|
VogeGandire posted:Yeah, the reason I've heard was the large Jewish population in Poland, and their regular bathing. I don't get how that would have saved the native population.  Surely not everyone involved in trading was Jewish. Good personal hygiene doesn't necessarily make you immune to flea bites, either. The Middle East suffered very heavily from the Black Death. This particular explanation sounds kind of like a Victorian-era urban legend that was meant to illustrate just how backwards and stinky medieval Europeans were. This part in particular:quote:Poland had a large Jewish community and accepted Jewish refugees who were scapegoated by other nations during the plague. Accepting refugees from plague-ridden areas was generally not a very good strategy to avoid the outbreak of plague in your own territory. It is intriguing, though. I'd also like to find out more about why Poland apparently managed to dodge the bullet.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2013 21:43
|
|
|
Poland was pretty sparsely populated at the time, and parts of it fluked out. I think we're dealing with a statistical illusion: a country which was later to become a regional superpower and a significant centre of modern history, but which at the time was a largely rural backwater, was mostly spared of the plague in the same way that other less-documented areas far from trade routes were. Then we extrapolate wildly. I mean, that map is terrible isn't it? The Kolan peninsula? Northern Finland? There were probably more plague deaths in Poland than those places. The era might be under documented in Poland too. That aside, I'm pretty sure the best possible response is that Poland was less well connected than Western Europe, and it had nothing to do with Jews or bathing.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2013 21:59
|
|
|
Poland was also pretty largely reliant on sea trade (with points south and west, anyway) - the draining of the swamps in the Vistula basin was (IIRC) a work in progress through the sixteenth century and the Carpathians are actually a surprisingly obnoxious barrier. So by the time the plague would have reasonably reached them, mostly through the Baltic ports, they'd have had a bit more warning than a lot of places and thus had an easier time putting up a quarantine, in addition - as Ras Het says - to being a bit low on population density. It might have gotten a little messier if the plague had popped up 80 years earlier; Poland as a unified state didn't really get its poo poo together until 1320.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2013 22:17
|
|
|
Phlegmish posted:Accepting refugees from plague-ridden areas was generally not a very good strategy to avoid the outbreak of plague in your own territory. I had assumed the goons meant the Jews had been taken in over preceding years/decades and their bathing habits had spread over time. Even if Poland just opened their doors to Jewish plague victims a cultural shift such as this one (supposedly) is wouldn't have taken place overnight.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2013 01:37
|
|
|
People of the Middle Ages in Europe bathed more often than the popular imagination gives them credit for. They might not have bathed as often as Jews (I really have no idea how to compare the two cultures here), but bathing was hardly a rare thing, especially among the nobility and clergy. edit: A time of plague is probably one of the only times where it's good to be a landlocked, remote country since that means you're less exposed to vectors of disease. A lot of others have mentioned this, but I would agree that trade routes were probably the greatest vector for the spread of the plague. New Division fucked around with this message at 02:43 on May 24, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 24, 2013 02:33
|
|
|
Kingsbury3 posted:I made a new Europe. The new flag of the Canadian Empire, circa 2030.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2013 02:51
|
|
|
Yeah now that everyone mentioned it, the whole "Jews taught us to bathe" sounds really "Look how dumb and unenlightened we were back then  ". I should have prefaced that explanation with it being what I recall hearing from a source I can't recall and so was pretty unreliable  . Sparse population makes more sense.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2013 06:31
|
|
|
New Division posted:People of the Middle Ages in Europe bathed more often than the popular imagination gives them credit for. They might not have bathed as often as Jews (I really have no idea how to compare the two cultures here), but bathing was hardly a rare thing, especially among the nobility and clergy.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2013 07:25
|
|
|
One explanation I've seen is that public baths were quite popular during the early Middle Ages (a legacy of the Roman empire). But when the plague arrived they helped the disease spread faster in a community. It didn't take long for people to realize the link between going to the baths and getting sick, so they stopped going. Even if they didn't know why it was happening, it was a sensible decision. It also gave birth to wrong notions of hygiene ("disease is in the water and enters you through the skin"... which isn't that wrong considering rivers were used as open-air sewers) starting in the Renaissance that made any kind of bathing seem dangerous. That's when you start This map seems to be more accurate than the other one: 
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2013 09:00
|
|
|
The baths in Roman times were a disease center as well, especially when sick people were told to go take a nice bath.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2013 09:37
|
|
|
Another explanation I have seen for bathing falling out of favour after the medieval period was lack of fuel. Specifically, in medieval times cities and towns weren't very large and usually surrounded by forests providing a ready source of firewood for heating water. As cities grew and forests were turned into farmland, the supply of firewood diminished and for most it became prohibitively expensive to use it to heat water for bathing.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2013 10:00
|
|
|
Plaguetalk lead me to looking up the plague in Finland and a Wikipedia article contained this nugget: "In Turku, townsfolk would throw out of windows onto the street the bodies of those who died of the plague and sometimes those who were not yet dead." Seems like a good idea though. (Unless you are on the street.) EDIT: This was in the 1700s.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2013 10:05
|
|
|
Teddybear posted:This explains so much of modern antisemites. "drat Jews and their general tidiness" A lot of modern antisemitic stereotypes actually have pretty deep historical roots. The whole stereotype of the avaricious Jewish loanshark is grounded in early banking creating a market niche for providing credit for profit that most Christians couldn't fill. The Catholic prohibition of usury (also prohibited in Islam) meant that it wasn't possible for Christians to get involved in lending for profit without some creative legalese and enough political clout to keep Rome off your back. There was even a practice of having a Court Jew in many royal houses who served as a personal banker and financial adviser. Italian banking houses were the main competitors with Jewish financiers during this period, and the Shakespearean character Shylock is an example of the stereotypes and prejudices of the time. It's a great example of a smear campaign against competing businesses.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2013 10:39
|
|
|
In continental Europe peasants usually did not have any money, so when needed any they went to money lenders. They in turn asked for outrageous interest rates because they knew most, if not all, peasants would default on their payment anyway.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2013 11:25
|
|
|
Riso posted:In continental Europe peasants usually did not have any money, so when needed any they went to money lenders. They in turn asked for outrageous interest rates because they knew most, if not all, peasants would default on their payment anyway. So, because most (if not all) of those gentile, unwashed, plague-ridden peasants defaulted and the moneylenders thus lost their money, they asked for outrageous interest rates just for fun/to make it more interesting, but lend the money they knew they wouldn't get back anyway? "Ok, I'll lend you the twenty million bitcoins now and because I know you will never pay me back anyway, let's say you should pay me back 30 million bitcoins in a years time!" That's a business model I don't quite understand, to be frank. Is there a word for the opposite of anti-semitism? (Like Pratchetts "knurd" as the opposite of "drunk", drunk - sober - knurd)
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2013 14:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 18:59 |
|
|
goethe42 posted:So, because most (if not all) of those gentile, unwashed, plague-ridden peasants defaulted and the moneylenders thus lost their money, they asked for outrageous interest rates just for fun/to make it more interesting, but lend the money they knew they wouldn't get back anyway? I guess the idea is that with high interest rates, it's easier to recoup your losses in the cases where the debtors do manage to pay you back.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2013 14:52
|
|
