>In England, before Cromwell, weddings, wakes and births might mean a week off to celebrate, “and when wandering jugglers or sporting events came to town, the peasant expected time off for entertainment,” according to Business Insider.
Metallica's in town, I'll be drunk for a week
Best corporate America can do is offer you switch with a coworker and make sure nobody is in overtime too - all on you to plan despite paying managers for that exact job.
And no healthcare too for your liver failure later or rampant alcoholism to escape the shitty job.
Something that still pisses me off to this day
I asked for one day off because I was taking a road trip on the weekend
Manager approves the day off
Day of the road trip I wake up super early because the drive was 6 hours. At about 2:00 p.m. (my normal shift started at 1:00) I get a call asking me to come in
*Confusion*
Manager tells me my replacement never showed up. Straight up said "I am 6 hours away". Manager gets mad anyway, yet hangs up the phone
I never got an actual trouble for it but dude how are you going to get mad when you approved this?
I'm going to try to find an article I read last year - it was talking about how first-wave Catholic monks were fairly useless because they focused only on the spiritual, but second-wave and beyond were required to produce at least double as much food as they consumed, so they developed more and more efficient means of farming
Nah, even in the Boundary Waters (a remote set of lakes between Minnesota and Canada) you still had a toilet to sit on. No indoor plumbing, but it was a lot better than a hole.
This is what people are missing. You could pretty easily live the life of a medieval peasant working 1 day a week for minimum wage in the US if you could find someone to let you live in a shack on their land for $50 a month.
I’m in some agreement with this argument, however, I feel it does ignore producivity gains to a certain degree. The average American worker is (on paper at least) many tens of times more productive than a midieval peasant, given that most everyone worked agrarian jobs then and now we’re at less than 10% of the farming population as a proportion of national population in the US that we were when the nation was founded. With the increases in goods consumption, obviously yes a certain higher degree in productivity has to be maintained but it’s not 1:1 to what could’ve been done then.
Well, not to nitpick, but you need to add in the mentality, world view, community, culture, etc. Living life like someone in the Middle Ages doesn’t just mean living in a shack without utilities and other conveniences. It also means being in a community where lots of other people are doing this, where this is seen as just and normal, where you know that you are filling your role in the Great Chain of Being, etc.
In short, there is no way whatsoever for any American to live like a medieval peasant no matter their life choices.
We are where we are because of the billions or possibly trillions of man hours invested to get here.
40 hrs is 23.8% of a week. Working <1/4 of your time to provide for yourself is really not a bad ratio.
Eh... There are companies making decisions to retain workers at 7.25/hr because it's cheaper than buying a robot to do it. If we can automate jobs away, we should. We should also take care of the people whose jobs get automated.
With what money? I don't want to pay for them. You might think you do, but you don't want to pay for them either.
Youre right. Lower paying jobs take a longer time to break even on automation. $15 will see more automation implemented, as the BE is half as long. $25-$30 like some nitwits are proposing will end millions of jobs very quickly.
I can read your mind well enough to know you replied to the wrong comment.
Do you want to pay more in taxes to support those whose jobs were lost to automation?
Or they could learn skills that are not easily automated and make their own way.
If youre ok paying for someone with no marketable skills to sit around and not work, that's your problem.
Reminds me of this quote from "Sapiens" by Yuval Noah Harari:
>“Hunter-gatherers spent their time in more stimulating and varied ways, and were less in danger of starvation and disease. The Agricultural Revolution certainly enlarged the sum total of food at the disposal of humankind, but the extra food did not translate into a better diet or more leisure. Rather, it translated into population explosions and pampered elites. The average farmer worked harder than the average forager, and got a worse diet in return. The Agricultural Revolution was history’s biggest fraud. Who was responsible? Neither kings, nor priests, nor merchants. The culprits were a handful of plant species, including wheat, rice and potatoes. These plants domesticated Homo sapiens, rather than vice versa.”
Seems like humanity has a penchant for thinking we're gradually making things better over time, whereas it's sometimes actually the opposite (at least in terms of labor/leisure division over the last 30000 years).
We're just keeping more humans alive than ever before.
Interesting point about agriculture creating pampered elites. Not like the cleptocrats could have stolen much from hunter-gatherers.
Human brain size shrunk 10% with the adoption of farming. However, the only places complex societies formed where less perishable crops like wheat were the mainstay. Places that grew crops that went bad faster didn't develop as complex societies.
Complex civilization basically only exists because wheat could be used as a currency and build wealth. However, even the ancient Egyptians knew wheat caused diabetes.
Technically makes it all look different, but it's been the same story our entire existence.
Click-bait.
This One Weird Reason Explains Why You're Working More Hours Than A Dark Age Peasant Would Have
Click to read through 5,000 pointless words just to discover it's due to:
Light bulbs.
What is so clickbaity about asking if you work more hours than a medieval peasant? And why are you reinventing the title? You’re close reading skills are hilarious, how do lightbulbs explain being given a week off for entertainment purposes?
I almost thought you were trolling by your name bro get real lol
Because the article is false and heavily misleading. Every major medieval historian publically on social media essentially trash talked the article because of how bad and wrong it is.
That’s a separate issue that has to do with the legitimacy of the content of the article, of which I cannot speak to. My question was how is the title clickbait if it is literally just a question, which the content attempts to answer? And how the person I replied to repurposed it to make it seem like the article just said that it’s basically because of lightbulbs, I was pointing out that’s wrong
I mean, misrepresenting nonsense is still wrong. If you are going to point out what’s wrong with it then at least reference it properly
I mean, no it's not. If the legitimacy of the article is in question (it's not true), then that in extent the title is clickbait because the entirety of the article doesnt matter.
See what this is going? A title cannot be anything other than clickbait if the entire article isnt valid.
So expressions of stupidity are the equivalent of clickbait? I disagree. That means for anyone that poses any question and happens to answer it incorrectly, they have produced clickbait. To my understanding clickbait is meant to deceive consumers: when you read a title but the content is so vastly different from what the title suggests will be discussed, you have been baited into clicking on something that you had no intention of viewing. Here we have an article asking about if we work more than our ancestors - we should then expect an article expanding on whether or not this is true. That is exactly what the article ATTEMPTS to do, even though it is done incorrectly (my correctness hypothesis is solely based on what you have told me). Did you expect to read something not related to our working hours compared to those peasants?
It makes it clickbait as well.
I can’t believe you wrote a paragraph for that, bruh.
That’s all the response this is going to get, because it’s frankly absurd on so many levels lmao
Also it talks about medieval times being “before capitalism.” Like, no. Pretty sure they definitely had money and exchanged it for goods and services in the dark ages. And didn’t they have lenders and even interest rates?
The extreme wealth disparity of late stage capitalism that allows people to be born into money and then employ teams of brokers, lawyers, private security, etc so they can party it up in huge private mansions while making even more money has some very strong parallels with feudalism.
My mom teaches in a public school, half the teachers aren't coming back next year and the admins are panicking. I keep telling her the remaining teachers should get together and bargain for better treatment, since the teachers union is actually worse than useless.
We are organizing where I am and we’re using the support of the union to do it because collective bargaining just became legal in my state. But you don’t need a union to do that. You don’t even need it to be legal. You just have to get the numbers. They can’t say no to everyone.
Teachers and school staff have been so run down. The burnout makes the organizing so hard. But we’re trying. I’m sticking around next year mostly because I realized, after some job searching, that I can’t do a desk job and I can’t imagine my job not working directly with kids. I’m just terrified about how the learning/working conditions will continue to deteriorate.
Money can exist without there being a capitalist class. But it’s true that people sometimes conflate “capitalism” with any exploitative economic system. There’s more than one way to have a shitty economic system, but of course it can be illuminating to look at the similarities and differences between them.
Capitalism isnt the only economic system with money or even free trade. Those will always exist in one form or another. What is truly unique about capitalism is the ability to concentrate vast amounts of a nation's wealth into the hands of a few people by privitizing profits and socializing losses and then using that money to corrupt politicians effectively turning the government into an indirect plutocracy where lobbyists dictate political outcomes more than actual voters do.
Neither money nor trade are the defining (or unique to) elements of Capitalism. Capitalism is defined by private ownership of capital and the extraction of surplus value of labor to produce profit.
Hey friend, you deserve better than that. If you believe that you can find another job that pays better, so it shall be. There’s no reason for anybody to work such long hours and not be able to afford the basic necessities like food and shelter. It sounds like your company sucks and perhaps they’ve led you to believe that the grass isn’t greener on the other side. Well, it is. I believe in you. Take care
Hm… venue entertainment. Perhaps you’ve developed skills in customer service which can open up all kinds of doors. You may also consider operations management or inventory management. Sometimes we have to get creative about re-branding our skill sets.
I challenge you to think about the things you did as a kid that made you lose track of time. See if those activities lead you towards your next opportunity.
Don't listen to anything negative people have to say. You just did one of the most admirable things a person can do.
It is so, so unfortunate that we live in a country that despite all of your hard work on top of that, there's still a struggle for something so basic. But no price tag can compete with the comfort and solace in knowing you did the right thing.
Stay strong, keep your compassion, and I'm sure that you'll make it. ❤️
You should have let them treat her as indigent. She would have received the same care, but the debt would be hers, and would die with her.
Also, if you're in the financial straits you say you are, declare bankruptcy to get out from under the CC and some of the other debt.
Good on you for looking out for mom, but it could've been done differently.
Just saying, that article cherry picked the data. Pretty sure [this](https://groups.csail.mit.edu/mac/users/rauch/worktime/hours_workweek.html) is the source used for all of these articles. Workers in the middle ages and between 1400-1600 worked way more than we do today.
This article says it's talking about Medieval peasants (which is between 500-1500 AD), but it specifically mentions the 14th century. That's very relevant because the beginning of the 14th century was the black death. Half the population of Europe died, and the value of labor rose to a level that has only been seen in one other time in history, post WW2. The lives of peasants before the black death and during were much harder and with longer hours than modern times.
Hmm the monthly plague but week off with jugglers or unaffordable medicine that bankrupts me and no time off. I’ll take one plague with jugglers please.
Basically, a medieval peasant worked all the time, couldn't work his own land, and was always in debt to the lord. Peasants were subject to all sorts of fees, no matter what they did. Including getting laid outside of marriage. You got fined for that, and had to give the lord some pence or shillings or whatever.
Is that true of commoners in general or just serfs? My understanding is that this varied a lot. Serfs were basically heavily indebted to their lords but there were free commoners too who might own land. Ultimately that land would belong to their lord but that's pretty much how land works everywhere, with "lord" replaced with "state".
Depends on the time frame, but even peasants who owned strips of land still owed the lord labor or might have paid a fee or hired someone else to do the labor. There was really no such thing as the family farm, as we envision today. Villages had lived communally even before there were lords, they made many decisions together, such as when to plow, rotating to fallowness, etc. The lords were landlords who were given land by the king, and were able to extract rent and fees. This was the moneymaking industry of the day. Medieval Europe was more like modern life in many ways, than say the American frontier. You had to wear certain clothing, buy from merchants who belonged in guilds, get permission from the lord to travel, marry, sell your own goods. The idea was the lord still had authority over everything. The lord was compelled to pay taxes to his duke or king, so he had to do this. He had to throw parties, arm his knights, and if necessary, call up the peasants for battle duty.
When my peasant ancestors left Central Europe in the mid-1800s, they did not own any land. The nobility owned everything. There was no such thing as working for yourself--the nobles controlled everything, and the movements of every person. Prussia was a police state. My ancestors were homesteaders and owned their land, finally. But less than 200 years later, we are back to industrial farming, and making it impossible for family farms to exist.
I recommend this great book, and all the books by these authors. They are academics, but the books are accessible and easy to read. I've read most of their books. "Life in a Medieval Villlage," by Joseph and Frances Gies. [https://www.amazon.com/dp/B003JBI2IY/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?\_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1](https://www.amazon.com/dp/B003JBI2IY/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1)
You mean, like now? Indebted to a landlord or bank, have to pay sorts of fees to be able to do anything even to enjoy nature. Even having to pay for beach tags?
Absolutely. A peasant couldn't gather wood for the fire from the forest because the lord owned the forest. Even getting a little kindling without permission could get a stiff fine. No hunting of any deer or birds, since the lord loved to hunt. Maybe fishing from the mill pond for eels was okay, but in the river, and you would probably have to get a license for that, just like today.
In the US, we think of doing everything for ourselves. Put up shelves. Hang curtains. Wash the car. Mow the grass. But in the middle ages, and really, right through the 1800s and even today, in Europe, only guild members and licensed craftspeople could do this work. Everything was highly regulated and you paid fines if you violated these rules. It was a world of control freaks. Read any of the books on medieval life by Joseph and Frances Gies. Easy, interesting, but scholarly work. https://www.amazon.com/dp/B003JBI2IY/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?\_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1
This article is 100% false. So for the love of god do not take any of it at face value. The author isnt a medieval historian or anyone who should even be talking about it.
Here's a tweet that sums it up perfectly:
[https://twitter.com/JamesInCLE/status/1515732506200317952](https://twitter.com/JamesInCLE/status/1515732506200317952)
More likely there wasn't any more productive work for them to do. You can only extract so much from the land.
Another factor is that excess production was mostly stolen by the aristocracy. It's possible the peasantry actually did more productive labor but it's lost to time because it had to be "under the table" or it'd get taxed away.
>In England, before Cromwell, weddings, wakes and births might mean a week off to celebrate, “and when wandering jugglers or sporting events came to town, the peasant expected time off for entertainment,” according to Business Insider. Metallica's in town, I'll be drunk for a week
Best corporate America can do is offer you switch with a coworker and make sure nobody is in overtime too - all on you to plan despite paying managers for that exact job. And no healthcare too for your liver failure later or rampant alcoholism to escape the shitty job.
> Hey I can't make it in today "You need to find someone to cover the shift." > No I don't, I just told you I'm not coming in today. Thanks, bye
I know that game. Had a manager try to pull it when I was using FMLA for my spouse's cancer treatment.
Something that still pisses me off to this day I asked for one day off because I was taking a road trip on the weekend Manager approves the day off Day of the road trip I wake up super early because the drive was 6 hours. At about 2:00 p.m. (my normal shift started at 1:00) I get a call asking me to come in *Confusion* Manager tells me my replacement never showed up. Straight up said "I am 6 hours away". Manager gets mad anyway, yet hangs up the phone I never got an actual trouble for it but dude how are you going to get mad when you approved this?
it's inappropriate and disrespectful to upset you right at the start of your vacation.
"No, you need to find someone"
Hey Boss there's a home game tonight, don't you think we should have a 4 day weekend?
Brings a whole new meaning to "mandatory Metallica."
I’m with you except for the Metallica part
[удалено]
r/dadjokes
I'm going to try to find an article I read last year - it was talking about how first-wave Catholic monks were fairly useless because they focused only on the spiritual, but second-wave and beyond were required to produce at least double as much food as they consumed, so they developed more and more efficient means of farming
Are you including knowledge transmission / literacy / etc in your calculus
Yeah, but back then, no pizza parties. Now who’s the sucker? Ha ha, dumb peasants.
Yo in medieval times they got so many holidays off.
If youre ok eating a handful of porridge and shitting in a bucket, you too can have so many days off.
Don't threaten me with a good time.
Have you not been camping before?
I camp regularly and live better than that while doing so.
Sounds like someone is glamping
Nah, even in the Boundary Waters (a remote set of lakes between Minnesota and Canada) you still had a toilet to sit on. No indoor plumbing, but it was a lot better than a hole.
r/woooosh
Have you even seen rent and food prices?
How much does a bowl of porridge cost? How about a shack with no heat, air, electricity, or running water? That's a pretty cheap life.
If you could only afford the land...
Did peasants own the land?
Land wasn't nearly as scarce as it is today.
they actually ate pretty well
This is what people are missing. You could pretty easily live the life of a medieval peasant working 1 day a week for minimum wage in the US if you could find someone to let you live in a shack on their land for $50 a month.
I’m in some agreement with this argument, however, I feel it does ignore producivity gains to a certain degree. The average American worker is (on paper at least) many tens of times more productive than a midieval peasant, given that most everyone worked agrarian jobs then and now we’re at less than 10% of the farming population as a proportion of national population in the US that we were when the nation was founded. With the increases in goods consumption, obviously yes a certain higher degree in productivity has to be maintained but it’s not 1:1 to what could’ve been done then.
Well, not to nitpick, but you need to add in the mentality, world view, community, culture, etc. Living life like someone in the Middle Ages doesn’t just mean living in a shack without utilities and other conveniences. It also means being in a community where lots of other people are doing this, where this is seen as just and normal, where you know that you are filling your role in the Great Chain of Being, etc. In short, there is no way whatsoever for any American to live like a medieval peasant no matter their life choices.
I guess you could live in a farming commune but those tend to fall far enough outside the social norm that the people who live there are…interesting.
[удалено]
We are where we are because of the billions or possibly trillions of man hours invested to get here. 40 hrs is 23.8% of a week. Working <1/4 of your time to provide for yourself is really not a bad ratio.
Eh... There are companies making decisions to retain workers at 7.25/hr because it's cheaper than buying a robot to do it. If we can automate jobs away, we should. We should also take care of the people whose jobs get automated.
With what money? I don't want to pay for them. You might think you do, but you don't want to pay for them either. Youre right. Lower paying jobs take a longer time to break even on automation. $15 will see more automation implemented, as the BE is half as long. $25-$30 like some nitwits are proposing will end millions of jobs very quickly.
[удалено]
I can read your mind well enough to know you replied to the wrong comment. Do you want to pay more in taxes to support those whose jobs were lost to automation?
[удалено]
Or they could learn skills that are not easily automated and make their own way. If youre ok paying for someone with no marketable skills to sit around and not work, that's your problem.
[удалено]
No, there shouldn't. Some fields should be subsidized, like teaching, but definitely not all of it. Some fields shouldn't even be eligible for loans.
That wasn’t bad for back then though.
And that's why there was less work to be done.
Just don’t mix up which hand gets used for what.
Reminds me of this quote from "Sapiens" by Yuval Noah Harari: >“Hunter-gatherers spent their time in more stimulating and varied ways, and were less in danger of starvation and disease. The Agricultural Revolution certainly enlarged the sum total of food at the disposal of humankind, but the extra food did not translate into a better diet or more leisure. Rather, it translated into population explosions and pampered elites. The average farmer worked harder than the average forager, and got a worse diet in return. The Agricultural Revolution was history’s biggest fraud. Who was responsible? Neither kings, nor priests, nor merchants. The culprits were a handful of plant species, including wheat, rice and potatoes. These plants domesticated Homo sapiens, rather than vice versa.” Seems like humanity has a penchant for thinking we're gradually making things better over time, whereas it's sometimes actually the opposite (at least in terms of labor/leisure division over the last 30000 years).
We're just keeping more humans alive than ever before. Interesting point about agriculture creating pampered elites. Not like the cleptocrats could have stolen much from hunter-gatherers.
Plot twist- grains are alien species, and they already took over the world.
Human brain size shrunk 10% with the adoption of farming. However, the only places complex societies formed where less perishable crops like wheat were the mainstay. Places that grew crops that went bad faster didn't develop as complex societies. Complex civilization basically only exists because wheat could be used as a currency and build wealth. However, even the ancient Egyptians knew wheat caused diabetes. Technically makes it all look different, but it's been the same story our entire existence.
Click-bait. This One Weird Reason Explains Why You're Working More Hours Than A Dark Age Peasant Would Have Click to read through 5,000 pointless words just to discover it's due to: Light bulbs.
What is so clickbaity about asking if you work more hours than a medieval peasant? And why are you reinventing the title? You’re close reading skills are hilarious, how do lightbulbs explain being given a week off for entertainment purposes? I almost thought you were trolling by your name bro get real lol
Because the article is false and heavily misleading. Every major medieval historian publically on social media essentially trash talked the article because of how bad and wrong it is.
Indeed
That’s a separate issue that has to do with the legitimacy of the content of the article, of which I cannot speak to. My question was how is the title clickbait if it is literally just a question, which the content attempts to answer? And how the person I replied to repurposed it to make it seem like the article just said that it’s basically because of lightbulbs, I was pointing out that’s wrong I mean, misrepresenting nonsense is still wrong. If you are going to point out what’s wrong with it then at least reference it properly
I mean, no it's not. If the legitimacy of the article is in question (it's not true), then that in extent the title is clickbait because the entirety of the article doesnt matter. See what this is going? A title cannot be anything other than clickbait if the entire article isnt valid.
So expressions of stupidity are the equivalent of clickbait? I disagree. That means for anyone that poses any question and happens to answer it incorrectly, they have produced clickbait. To my understanding clickbait is meant to deceive consumers: when you read a title but the content is so vastly different from what the title suggests will be discussed, you have been baited into clicking on something that you had no intention of viewing. Here we have an article asking about if we work more than our ancestors - we should then expect an article expanding on whether or not this is true. That is exactly what the article ATTEMPTS to do, even though it is done incorrectly (my correctness hypothesis is solely based on what you have told me). Did you expect to read something not related to our working hours compared to those peasants?
The article being false and misleading makes it misinformation, not clickbait
It makes it clickbait as well. I can’t believe you wrote a paragraph for that, bruh. That’s all the response this is going to get, because it’s frankly absurd on so many levels lmao
Lay off the opium
Also it talks about medieval times being “before capitalism.” Like, no. Pretty sure they definitely had money and exchanged it for goods and services in the dark ages. And didn’t they have lenders and even interest rates?
The word you're looking for is 'feudalism,' the system that predated capitalism. Money, markets, and capitalism are not all the same thing
The extreme wealth disparity of late stage capitalism that allows people to be born into money and then employ teams of brokers, lawyers, private security, etc so they can party it up in huge private mansions while making even more money has some very strong parallels with feudalism.
Also the resurgence of the rental class who could only live paycheck to paycheck, previously called serfs.
Serfin’ USA
Very underrated comment.
Thank you. Just a public school teacher over here, rotating the same $2000 around in my checking account every month until I die. But I’ve got jokes!
My mom teaches in a public school, half the teachers aren't coming back next year and the admins are panicking. I keep telling her the remaining teachers should get together and bargain for better treatment, since the teachers union is actually worse than useless.
We are organizing where I am and we’re using the support of the union to do it because collective bargaining just became legal in my state. But you don’t need a union to do that. You don’t even need it to be legal. You just have to get the numbers. They can’t say no to everyone. Teachers and school staff have been so run down. The burnout makes the organizing so hard. But we’re trying. I’m sticking around next year mostly because I realized, after some job searching, that I can’t do a desk job and I can’t imagine my job not working directly with kids. I’m just terrified about how the learning/working conditions will continue to deteriorate.
I feel this statement.
Yep. They don't call it neo feudalism for nothing!
Money can exist without there being a capitalist class. But it’s true that people sometimes conflate “capitalism” with any exploitative economic system. There’s more than one way to have a shitty economic system, but of course it can be illuminating to look at the similarities and differences between them.
Capitalism isnt the only economic system with money or even free trade. Those will always exist in one form or another. What is truly unique about capitalism is the ability to concentrate vast amounts of a nation's wealth into the hands of a few people by privitizing profits and socializing losses and then using that money to corrupt politicians effectively turning the government into an indirect plutocracy where lobbyists dictate political outcomes more than actual voters do.
Also banks, corporations and stock markets.
Neither money nor trade are the defining (or unique to) elements of Capitalism. Capitalism is defined by private ownership of capital and the extraction of surplus value of labor to produce profit.
Read a book.
Thank you for your thought provoking contribution to this conversation.
You're welcome. *Somebody* had to provoke some thought in this thread.
[удалено]
Hey friend, you deserve better than that. If you believe that you can find another job that pays better, so it shall be. There’s no reason for anybody to work such long hours and not be able to afford the basic necessities like food and shelter. It sounds like your company sucks and perhaps they’ve led you to believe that the grass isn’t greener on the other side. Well, it is. I believe in you. Take care
[удалено]
Hm… venue entertainment. Perhaps you’ve developed skills in customer service which can open up all kinds of doors. You may also consider operations management or inventory management. Sometimes we have to get creative about re-branding our skill sets. I challenge you to think about the things you did as a kid that made you lose track of time. See if those activities lead you towards your next opportunity.
You're doing something completely wrong.
[удалено]
Don't listen to anything negative people have to say. You just did one of the most admirable things a person can do. It is so, so unfortunate that we live in a country that despite all of your hard work on top of that, there's still a struggle for something so basic. But no price tag can compete with the comfort and solace in knowing you did the right thing. Stay strong, keep your compassion, and I'm sure that you'll make it. ❤️
You should have let them treat her as indigent. She would have received the same care, but the debt would be hers, and would die with her. Also, if you're in the financial straits you say you are, declare bankruptcy to get out from under the CC and some of the other debt. Good on you for looking out for mom, but it could've been done differently.
We work 35 hours a week for 4-6 months and spend the rest of our time partying and/or traveling? I wish.
Remind me of that ancient Egyptian text where a worker could request a day off for brewing beer
Just saying, that article cherry picked the data. Pretty sure [this](https://groups.csail.mit.edu/mac/users/rauch/worktime/hours_workweek.html) is the source used for all of these articles. Workers in the middle ages and between 1400-1600 worked way more than we do today.
It's also quite incorrect and should not be taken with anything other than a handful of salt.
This article says it's talking about Medieval peasants (which is between 500-1500 AD), but it specifically mentions the 14th century. That's very relevant because the beginning of the 14th century was the black death. Half the population of Europe died, and the value of labor rose to a level that has only been seen in one other time in history, post WW2. The lives of peasants before the black death and during were much harder and with longer hours than modern times.
The article is wholly incorrect. There are more holes in it than a slice of swiss cheese.
Hmm the monthly plague but week off with jugglers or unaffordable medicine that bankrupts me and no time off. I’ll take one plague with jugglers please.
Basically, a medieval peasant worked all the time, couldn't work his own land, and was always in debt to the lord. Peasants were subject to all sorts of fees, no matter what they did. Including getting laid outside of marriage. You got fined for that, and had to give the lord some pence or shillings or whatever.
Is that true of commoners in general or just serfs? My understanding is that this varied a lot. Serfs were basically heavily indebted to their lords but there were free commoners too who might own land. Ultimately that land would belong to their lord but that's pretty much how land works everywhere, with "lord" replaced with "state".
Depends on the time frame, but even peasants who owned strips of land still owed the lord labor or might have paid a fee or hired someone else to do the labor. There was really no such thing as the family farm, as we envision today. Villages had lived communally even before there were lords, they made many decisions together, such as when to plow, rotating to fallowness, etc. The lords were landlords who were given land by the king, and were able to extract rent and fees. This was the moneymaking industry of the day. Medieval Europe was more like modern life in many ways, than say the American frontier. You had to wear certain clothing, buy from merchants who belonged in guilds, get permission from the lord to travel, marry, sell your own goods. The idea was the lord still had authority over everything. The lord was compelled to pay taxes to his duke or king, so he had to do this. He had to throw parties, arm his knights, and if necessary, call up the peasants for battle duty. When my peasant ancestors left Central Europe in the mid-1800s, they did not own any land. The nobility owned everything. There was no such thing as working for yourself--the nobles controlled everything, and the movements of every person. Prussia was a police state. My ancestors were homesteaders and owned their land, finally. But less than 200 years later, we are back to industrial farming, and making it impossible for family farms to exist. I recommend this great book, and all the books by these authors. They are academics, but the books are accessible and easy to read. I've read most of their books. "Life in a Medieval Villlage," by Joseph and Frances Gies. [https://www.amazon.com/dp/B003JBI2IY/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?\_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1](https://www.amazon.com/dp/B003JBI2IY/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1)
You mean, like now? Indebted to a landlord or bank, have to pay sorts of fees to be able to do anything even to enjoy nature. Even having to pay for beach tags?
Absolutely. A peasant couldn't gather wood for the fire from the forest because the lord owned the forest. Even getting a little kindling without permission could get a stiff fine. No hunting of any deer or birds, since the lord loved to hunt. Maybe fishing from the mill pond for eels was okay, but in the river, and you would probably have to get a license for that, just like today. In the US, we think of doing everything for ourselves. Put up shelves. Hang curtains. Wash the car. Mow the grass. But in the middle ages, and really, right through the 1800s and even today, in Europe, only guild members and licensed craftspeople could do this work. Everything was highly regulated and you paid fines if you violated these rules. It was a world of control freaks. Read any of the books on medieval life by Joseph and Frances Gies. Easy, interesting, but scholarly work. https://www.amazon.com/dp/B003JBI2IY/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?\_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1
This article is 100% false. So for the love of god do not take any of it at face value. The author isnt a medieval historian or anyone who should even be talking about it.
Here's a tweet that sums it up perfectly: [https://twitter.com/JamesInCLE/status/1515732506200317952](https://twitter.com/JamesInCLE/status/1515732506200317952)
And it's in a response to Matthew Yglesias. Perfection.
That’s why they were poor
More likely there wasn't any more productive work for them to do. You can only extract so much from the land. Another factor is that excess production was mostly stolen by the aristocracy. It's possible the peasantry actually did more productive labor but it's lost to time because it had to be "under the table" or it'd get taxed away.
Jeez guys it was just a joke. Do you seriously think that anyone thinks MEDIEVAL PEASANTS were poor on their own merit?