History questions not worth their own thread III

[Louis XXIV]

This seems to fit in.

Good to know I'm on track there. However, it would also help to know what German population growth was over the same period. French population in a vacuum isn't as relevant as French growth compared to German growth. One would think at least World War II affected Germany as much.

 

[RRRaskolnikov]

Good to know I'm on track there. However, it would also help to know what German population growth was over the same period. French population in a vacuum isn't as relevant as French growth compared to German growth. One would think at least World War II affected Germany as much.

I took the demo data from the UK, Prussia/Germany and France from these pages (France,United Kingdom, and Germany) and excel them. Bear with me for the crappy look of the graph.

Seems to me the key is the 19th century, not the WWs. These seem to have stoped growth everywhere for obvious reasons, but the differences were there already.

 

[GamezRule]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Census_in_Germany
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demography_of_the_United_Kingdom#Population

 

[RRRaskolnikov]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Census_in_Germany
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demography_of_the_United_Kingdom#Population

Then french page for the UK has actually more data (interesting here) than the english ones That's usually the other way around...
Anyway there are some differences but they won't show on these graph scales anyway... I won't do them again

 

[Louis XXIV]

It looks like France and the UK sorta plateaued in the 1880s, while Germany kept growing. I wonder what the reason for that would be. Not that it has to be something that happened then. Whatever factor existed, France and the UK sort of hit their limit due to this factor (or factors) at that point, while that factor didn't affect Germany. I'm curious, were the data to be extended back to 1700, if France's population growth was roughly the same rate as its post-1800 growth.

 

[say1988]

Personally I am more interested in seeing comparitive fertility/birth rates and see how they stac up. The gap with France will obviously be even greater, but for Britain and Germany. A potential reason for their splitting apart could be shifts in migration patterns at the end of the 19th century.

 

[Louis XXIV]

Fertility rates could be one thing. So would life expectancy. So would immigration. There are many possible factors. My previous theory (aside from the war theory) was just a theory of sustainable growth (my theory being that France's point of sustainable growth was lower than Germany, which would be a product of overall economy). The idea would be that Germany's jump in industrialization allowed for a higher population than France.

 

[say1988]

Considering the long term rate of growth and the far higher emmigration rate for the Germans and British a significantly lower fetility rate is far more likely than not. The only other real option would be far more people dieing before their child bearing years.

It isn't saying why the difference exists (which was the original question), but it would be interesting to see the difference before migration is considered, and it would provide a comparison between Germany and Britain.

 

[spryllino]

Was the golden bull [of 1356] an acknowledgement of political factors that already existed?

It was more than an acknowledgement of political factors that already existed, because it reformed the system and significantly changed the way it operated.

 

[Dachs]

I would say that it would've been nonsensical if it had not been an acknowledgement of political factors that already existed.

 

[Yui108]

Were there any extant Norman nobility that aided the English in the opening stages of the Hundred Years War?

 

[Masada]

The only other real option would be far more people dieing before their child bearing years.

Or marrying later, thus reducing the number of fertile years which Weber tells me is what actually happened in France.

 

[Dachs]

[Goad, because I don't have the book with me] So why'd they marry later?

 

[say1988]

Which is a decrease in the fertility rate, as I said.

 

[Masada]

Which is a decrease in the fertility rate, as I said.

Not neccesarily

 

[say1988]

May I ask how? Decreasing the average number of children born, no matter the cause, inherently is a decrease in the fertility rate.

Unless you are trying to argue a greater gap between generations decreasing growth rate that way (which has nothing to do with the number of fertile years, so doesn't fit with your last post).

 

[Masada]

May I ask how? Decreasing the average number of children born, no matter the cause, inherently is a decrease in the fertility rate.

It doesn't need to decrease the average number of children born

EDIT: I should make this clear. Talking about 'fertility rates' as an end in itself rather than as a culmulation of a bunch of far more signficant, and ultimately far more proximate, choices undertaken by individuals is a little silly. Thus the notion that that France had a lower fertility rate than Germany is interesting but ultimately tells us nothing meaningful about why it was the case, which is original question

 

[GamezRule]

Actually, I think France has the highest fertility rate in Europe right now.

 

[say1988]

It doesn't need to decrease the average number of children born

Then how is it impacting overall population growth because they have less time to have children? If these people having fewer does not impact the average, then some other segment is having more so there is overall no net effect.

Thus the notion that that France had a lower fertility rate than Germany is interesting but ultimately tells us nothing meaningful about why it was the case, which is original question

I said so myself.

 

[Masada]

Then how is it impacting overall population growth because they have less time to have children? If these people having fewer does not impact the average, then some other segment is having more so there is overall no net effect.

I'm being facetious. The whole point I'm trying to make, unsuccessfully it seems, is that delayed marriage was a very French thing to do and that it was a significant factor in reducing the overall fertility rate and furthermore that it was a choice undertaken Frenchman.

I said so myself.

Eh? This exchange would suggest otherwise.