Quote Originally Posted by Brenus View Post
"You should read a little bit more on the causes of the said war. I recommend Jonathan Sumption's "Hundred Years war". Four volumes have been published, but the causes are dwelt upon in Volume I."
It might surprise you, but the best books about 100 years war are French.
It is a judgement-based claim of a person who is as much competent in the War in question as in the differences between a language and a dialect.

Quote Originally Posted by Brenus View Post
But to answer your smart remark, I was showing a cause relevant to the debate... Can't really see the importance of the death all the heirs of the French King as relevant...
Neither this nor "confiscation of the land by the king" is a cause. A marxist like you claim you are should know the difference between a cause and a pretext (aka casus belli). Otherwise you would say that the cause of WWI was the Sarajevo assassination.

Quote Originally Posted by Brenus View Post
"I'm not sure that the Emperor was the owner of ALL lands of the Empire." Well, I think he was. He could take back any title and any lands attached to the title.
In this case the judge is the owner of EVERYTHING since he can take anything from a person by the court's decision. The ability to decide doesn't make anyone the owner (unless he proclaims the estates his property after the decision).

Quote Originally Posted by Brenus View Post
https://www.britannica.com/topic/mir-Russian-community
Apparently, Encyclopedia Britanica disagree with you...
I didn't see anything in Britannica that is contrary to what I said. Unless it is the conclusion on how viable the Mir was. And I based my judgement (besides the previous knowlege) on this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obshchina
in which:
The institution was effectively destroyed by the Stolypin agrarian reforms (1906–1914), the Russian Revolution and subsequent collectivization of the USSR.

Quote Originally Posted by Brenus View Post
"Your statement is not accurate." Don't care. The purpose was to prove that it was not capitalism. Partially accurate is enough for the purpose.
I'm glad you admit it. Yet if I said something like "partially accurate" about my claims, I would earn a ton of contempt (and a hundredweight of insults) from you, now wouldn't I?