How did europe deal with the major demographic shift after the

>>3270333
Nice trips. Basically, the labor was fucked because the peasants were dropping like flies. The survivors were absolutely necessary for farming, so they had more say in their services. Basically the lords had to pay them better wages. Pre-plague peasants: dressed in drab, gray colors. Post-plague: they dressed in bright clothing as depicted in paintings. So yes, they got richer because there was enough labor to go around.

>>3270351
interesting, seems like such a drop in population meant an increase in quality of life

>>3270351
i feel like that's the case in most countries but in France the situation really worsened, there were numerous uprisings in the 14th centuries and most ended quite bloody

>>3270333
Huge rise in quality of life.

>>3270393
Yes obviously. Read "A Farewell to Alms"

>>3270333
In the short run, it was crippling for europe because of how quickly farmers, serfs, and peasants died, but in the long run, the culling of Europe's population actually was a net benefit for the survivors, namely with harvest yields now producing more food than there were mouths to feed with a third of the population gone, making food that much cheaper for the common man than ever before.

Also what played in favor was the demand for labor, now that there's less farmhands and skilled workers, those trades were more in demand than ever, with people now having the opportunity to gain jobs and experience in trades in tanning, smithing, shipbuilding, etc.

While the plague was disastrous for those who experienced it, the survivors reaped all the benefits of Europe's food and labor now serving a much smaller population, and historians have connected this massive improvement in labor distribution and food available to kick-starting the Renaissance that began to flourish just 2-3 generations later.

File: 1493859146195.jpg (334KB, 1462x1462px) Image search: [Google]

334KB, 1462x1462px

>>3270333
>How did europe deal with the major demographic shift after the black plague?

I honestly thought this was a misplaced futurism thread of some shit for a moment.

>>3270449
You are thinking about a Medieval Feudal society, as Post Modern Wage Society.
Your general idea is however correct: Because there was a surplus of farmlands that was cultivated, and by proxy food: Worker conditions improved.
Recovery also meant 2-3 small decades of less permanent warfare, enabling more stable trade routes to the nobility.

>>3270333
>>3270351
The plague was used by G-d Jesus to liberate the peasants from suffering and to punish the burgoise

Amen

File: download (2).jpg (6KB, 151x114px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 151x114px

>>3270333
Greeting from /TG.

>How did europe deal with the major demographic shift after the black plague?

To answer this it is important to understand how Europe was before that. For a long time before hand they had a system in which peasents would ask for the right to start a village or township and the lord of the area would approve or deny it. In the 12th the nobles figured out that making new settlements was a way to turn rather larger profit. This started a building rush that would last till ~1270. However some of those settlements were in places that were not economical viable. The Great Famine of 1315–1317 was a side effect of a large amount of population working lands that just were not worth working. When the black plague freed up living space/farm fields in the better areas people just left the less productive lands. Thus there was a lot of settlements that just disappeared. Or cities that had the hinterland that support them dry up.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Famine_of_1315%E2%80%9317

>Did it affect trade and wages?
A lot but much of that was undone about 30 years after words. On the wages issue serfs turn to their lords demanded better terms. The lords need everyone who could still work doing work and knew( at lest the smart ones) that saying no would cause their peasants to just up and leave to find work with another lord. The lords agreed to things they just did not want to agree but knew they had to. Like say granting freedom to their serfs change them to tenants.

>Why where there still so many peasant uprisings?


Fast froward to the end of labor shortage cause by the black plague and a great many of those lords or their heirs wanted to get back their old powers & revenue. If you were a peasant that had been born free and now someone is trying to make you a serf how would you feel? That is not the only reason for so many peasant uprisings in the late 14th century but it was the most common reason by far.

>>3270333
It contributed to Europes success. The upper, more intelligent class was outbreeding the lower class and things like the plague spread that process up. Read Gregory Clark

File: UmAqWaz.jpg (801KB, 2560x1920px) Image search: [Google]

801KB, 2560x1920px

>>3271041
this is amazingly interesting, are there any books on this stuff?

i once had a teacher who gave me a literal zero on an essay where i said the aftermath of the black plague caused a boost in trade because land became available for luxury products ( which in my opinion is true for areas like the low countries)

>>3271041
great answer

>>3271057
uninformed answer

>>3271165
For luxury item trade ( I am generalizing here) it caused a short term hard drop, a upturn in the period before the wage correction happen, and a return to old status quo for the most part after words. The food trade did change long term however. The outcome was a improvement of diet overall.

>which in my opinion is true for areas like the low countries

This may well be true, however the way of things in places like the low countries were not the same as in the rest of Europe. Serfdom never really took off in that area. This causes the economic and political structure to be very different then in the places around. Even their armies were very different do to a different distribution of wealth.

In any event the wage gains for workers did not really stick around but the quality of life did improve. Those gains in quality of life were caused by a more effective production structure. Food and clothes ended up being effectively cheaper.

>>3270333
just look it up
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consequences_of_the_Black_Death#Social.2C_environmental.2C_and_economic_effects

File: 4.-Abgar-Baltazar-Tarani-MNAR.jpg (70KB, 800x441px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 800x441px

Meanwhile fuck-all was changed in E.Europe

>>3273196
Influx of despots that spent their time ruining peasants lives for their own enrichment. Meanwhile western Europe saw the rise of economic opportunity. The black death was one thing that culled the population, but it would be hard to realize the true impact of the black death without the corresponding rise of international trade with expanded markets as well as strengthening internal trade through Europe.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crisis_of_the_Late_Middle_Ages

It's not all rainbows and unicorns.

in a way teh balck death was great in the long run

because there was such a labor shortage after the black death labor became ridiculously expensive, making peasant life much nicer. More importantly though it meant that investing in new, labor saving, techniques of production was far more profitable, encouraging innovation, in turn leading to the industrial revolution. its probably that pre black death Europe was approaching the high-level equilibrium trap.