Its history reaches back to the year 1331 when the mill Toratsmühle was mentioned for the first time. It must have existed before that date.
"Bavarians can do anything[2] — except speak German"
Akkadakka nach bayerischer Art: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n_gtGfAail4
PS. Fasching means Münich is part of the civilised world (as if the Limes weren't enough?). Ändä miini Miinig!
[1] The oldest venue where I've ever played a gig was built ca. 130.
[2] You all even have us beat for dialect wikipedia articles:
Also, he told me that he is very unhappy with high land prices around Munich. He could be a multi-millionaire immediately by selling his land, but his familiy tradition does not allow this. Due to the high land prices, if he gives a small part of the land to his daughter to build a house, he must sell another part to pay the property sales tax (not sure I understood this correctly).
According to a report published by the Bank of Korea in 2008 that looked at 41 countries, there were 5,586 companies older than 200 years.
3,146 (56%) are in Japan
837 (15%) in Germany
222 (4%) in the Netherlands
196 (3%) in France
Of the companies with more than 100 years of history, most of them (89%) employ fewer than 300 people. A nationwide Japanese survey counted more than 21,000 companies older than 100 years as of September 30, 2009.
> South of Munich
Bavaria is interesting; I was wondering how it would have fared as the various armies swept Europe in those eight centuries - Thirty Years War, Hundred Years War, and so on, but Bavaria seems to have been astonishing stable apart from a few incursions by Sweden and Napoleon.
Per wikipedia, "The Wittelsbach dynasty ruled Bavaria without interruption from 1180AD until 1918AD."
The middle ages wars didn't really involve the population. They were more a matter of aristocracy. Cities were raized, since those where the way to control land, but you generally left the peasants and their lords alone.
Peasants really didn't care who was the king. Nationalism was not a concept yet! Somebody was your liege lord since feudal competition abhors vacuum, but you didn't have much say in it. He probably didn't even speak your language.
They way medieval states handled their state business was that more or less, you had the king, the king had a large box called the "treasury", and then the aristocrats who had bent the knee for the king brought taxes to that box.
These barons and whatnots then extracted some surplus from the land as taxes for themselves, and for the king.
But this was really inefficient in pre-bureaucratic times! The state could maybe utilize 1 percent of the output since nobody knew how much a person produced, so everything was very, very, approximate.
So basically the 'state' and the 'people' were quite disconnected, and wars mostly affected the 'state' and not the people that much.
Wars really were a way to extend policy - which meant basically kings competed from what area they could command the nobility to carry taxes for them.
There was none of this 'total war' business. There were no industries to destroy, no population whose morale to pummel - since the morale of the population did not matter!
How do you exactly think armies are fed, armed, and paid? There are innumerable examples of revolts ignited due to the abuses of the local or occupying army.
This idea of "limited" warfare where a king took a few men and fought it out with his rival with the population not caring or suffering much is utterly deluded.
The Grande Armee marching across Europe would have made a huge impact to the zone within a day's ride of it, and much less outside of that. It was the 20th century which made giant fronts and mass bombing of civilians behind the front possible. Not that previous war was without its atrocities (Magdeburg), but the scale was proportionally smaller.
And, yes, tax and fiscal policy was completely dominated by warmaking related costs. As the state was much smaller and had little remit outside that.
"Nationalism was not a concept yet" also deserves looking at; the map looked very different, with either huge loose polyglot empires (Austria-Hungary, HRE) or smaller monarchial states, and the idea of self in the world that people would have had looked very different. Especially for much of the middle of that period it was bound more to religion.
The main question I wanted to answer was how could a stable culture survive in an area that went through so many wars. Not to make claims about "better way of living" or anything like that.
Another point which I wanted to stress that state powers in nations that lacked advanced bureaucracy (China, Ottomans) really did not have any way to extract wealth from the land efficiently.
Yes, if an army parked nearby they likely foraged the nearby areas. But an army is a very localized thing. There was no concept of "nation wide war economy". The extraction caused by the army was localized around the army.
So when we think about state induced horrors of the 20th century which were enabled by sophisticated bureaucracy and monoculture as anything else, those things did not really exist in medieval europe.
You really did not want a king to park his army in your backyard, that's for sure.