Insurgency vs. Civil War

[marct]

Not one of my big areas of expertise, but I would say that it began as something like an insurgency based on religion (with the inevitable cultural overtones) and then grew into a civil war and finally became a world war (of sorts, anyhow).

Could be, I honestly have no idea how to classify it using any of the current terms. "A great mutherin' mess" still seems to be the best classification for it .

In more on point terms, it appears to have had elements of insurgency, succession rebellion (e.g. Bohemia), various and sundry religious revolts / counter-revolts, inter-state warfare, military entrepreneurs becoming "legitimate" (e.g. Wallenstein), plus, plus, plus, as well as being a civil war in the HRE.

OTOH, another reason I brought it up is that the treaties that ended it are the foundation of the modern state system and, hence, a lot of our current definitions. Given that, it may be a useful case to look at to see if those definitions still make sense.

[Steve Blair]

I went with my escalation definition because it seems to me to make the most sense based on my conception of both insurgency and civil war. And I do think that, as you pointed out, you can have an insurgency going on within a civil war (depending on the territory in question). I honestly don't see most of these things as being as cut and dried as we might prefer. But then again, I also don't see the Indian Wars as being insurgencies, either....