16 ms·

What you can learn about medieval Europe if you focus on peasants

181 points by diodorus 6y ago

throwaway0a5e 6y ago
>monks and students enjoyed jokes that portrayed peasants as ludicrously dumb and foolish; and priests, friars, and bishops preached sermons that depicted “those who work” as objects of pity, charity, and disgust. Even Piers Plowman, a sympathetic portrayal of rural life, portrayed the peasant’s lot as hard and pitiable. The more things change. The more things stay the same.
airstrike 6y ago
> Clues about how privileged people in the Middle Ages regarded peasants can be found in their courtly songs, sarcastic proverbs, nasty jokes, and pious sermons. Knights and ladies were fond of songs known as pastourelles that told, among other things, about how easy it was for knights to have sex with peasant women or, failing that, to rape them; monks and students enjoyed jokes that portrayed peasants as ludicrously dumb and foolish; and priests, friars, and bishops preached sermons that depicted “those who work” as objects of pity, charity, and disgust. Even Piers Plowman, a sympathetic portrayal of rural life, portrayed the peasant’s lot as hard and pitiable. These literary texts are useful for understanding the often astoundingly negative attitudes of elites toward peasants, but they tell little about the peasants themselves. They also seem useful to contrast the American / protestant view of work as the path to salvation with the European / catholic view of work as something pitiful EDIT: See e.g. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Protestant_Ethic_and_the_Spirit_of_Capitalism https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Protestant_Ethic_and_the...
- michaelsbradley 6y ago
  That... doesn't make a lot of sense, at least on face value. In the Protestant view, your work (human effort) has no effect on your salvation. In the Catholic view, it has a lot to do with it. For a modern review see Laborem Exercens: http://www.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_14091981_laborem-exercens.html http://www.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/encyclicals/do....
  - jariel 6y ago
    I don't think it's to do with salvation so much as the cultural views towards people. Hearty, independent farmers, strong communitarian values, some degree of independence, faith and fealty are to be admired as virtuous, a form of 'working nobility'. I don't think the contrasting view of them as 'lowly' has anything to do with faith or religion but rather just a measure of perspective in culture. Ancient world vs Newer World. My grandparents were farmers, and were amazing people. I never worried about telling people that in North America. In many other parts of the world, it's the equivalent of saying "my grandparents were illiterate, stupid, servile, serfs". In many parts of the world, a few generations ago it was either 'Rich and Powerful' or 'a Stupid, Servile, Plebe' and there really wasn't much in between, and that to have Money, Wealth and Power was to be something inherently admirable in and of itself.
    - michaelsbradley 6y ago
      Fair enough. I was responding specifically to the parent comment: "...contrast the American / protestant view of work as the path to salvation with the European / catholic view of work as something pitiful" I think there's still more to understand re: "cultural view towards people" (the dynamics behind those views) in relation to a point that's central to the Catholic ethos operative then and now: Christ crucified, the power of God and the wisdom of God (cf. 1 Corinthians 1:18-31).
    - loopz 6y ago
      America was about getting to own land, for refugee serfs that had no opportunity to land and education.
      - jariel 6y ago
        Yes, that's fundamental to it. And so many things.
  - ardy42 6y ago
    >> They also seem useful to contrast the American / protestant view of work as the path to salvation with the European / catholic view of work as something pitiful > That... doesn't make a lot of sense, at least on face value. In the Protestant view, your work (human effort) has no effect on your salvation. In the Catholic view, it has a lot to do with it. I think he got it wrong. IIRC, the "Protestant work ethic" comes from a belief one's work ethic and success is proof of salivation, not the cause of it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protestant_work_ethic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protestant_work_ethic: > Since it was impossible to know who was predestined, the notion developed that it might be possible to discern that a person was elect (predestined) by observing their way of life. Hard work and frugality were thought to be two important consequences of being one of the elect. Protestants were thus attracted to these qualities and supposed to strive for reaching them.
- pomian 6y ago
  Is this a British centric view of history? It seems very one sided...
  - wombatmobile 6y ago
    > We can especially study peasants in England because the archives there are especially full. In some cases, the superiority of English archives stems from the more careful record-keeping of its administrators, but, in most cases, it has been a matter of survival through the centuries. Thanks to a strong legal system, a relatively stable social order, and a hefty dose of luck, England’s medieval archives have survived especially well. In France, for example, many medieval archives were destroyed during the French Revolution, and in Scotland, untold thousands of state documents were lost when a ship carrying them sank in 1661. History is built on evidence, and if there is little evidence, historians have much less to study and much less to say.
    - hnedeotes 6y ago
      I found it deeply ironic that you're replying to this: >Is this a British centric view of history? It seems very one sided... reply With that quote. This phrase: >In some cases, the superiority of English archives stems from the more careful record-keeping of its administrators, but, in most cases, it has been a matter of survival through the centuries Look at the words and order in which they appear "superiority", "careful record-keeping of its administrators". Starting from the lesser important cause to the main one, luck. In fact what it's saying is: > We can especially study peasants in England because the archives there are especially full, stemming from the simply fact that they survived through time, whereas in many other places they didn't due to many diverse factors" It goes on on the following phrase: > Thanks to a strong legal system, a relatively stable social order, and a hefty dose of luck, England’s medieval archives have survived especially well. Again the wording and the order, luck is the last item, although in the writer's defence, they wrote "hefty dose of luck". Nonetheless, when you read that phrase the first thing that is imprinted is the "strong legal system", "relative stable social order", and lastly luck no matter how hefty. And this is proved by the following remarks about how in France and Scotland a presumably high number of documents were lost, which invalidates the supposed "careful record-keeping" being a relevant reason. There's other examples where sacks, destruction or natural phenomena destroyed complete archives of many states, in Europe and elsewhere. This is not to say that the conclusions of the article are wrong or that in fact English book keeping wasn't good or even better than any of the other mentioned here, in some, a few, many or all cases, it's just the way it's written. *edit formatting
- sn41 6y ago
  Isn't this the work by Max Weber? The main idea here is that predestination of Calvin believed that certain people were predestined for salvation, and others were not. But the implication is that material wealth is an indication of whether one is to be saved or not. Weber points out that even though there were always wealthy classes all over the world - he is quite eclectic and treats ancient India, Babylon, China and Japan - modern capitalism and earning money for the sake of earning money, not for enjoying resulting luxuries, is Protestant in nature. I am not an expert on Catholic viewpoint, but many religions (other than Calvinism as Weber sees it) tend to see wealth as a hindrance to salvation - e.g. camel through the eye of the needle etc. But the doctrine of karma etc. do tend to emphasize work for work's sake. So I am not sure I completely agree with Weber (he has works on Hinduism, Judaism etc. which are also insightful and unique takes on religion).
- anthk 6y ago
  I am from Spain, some of oldest dirty jokes/limericks date back to Middle Ages, too.
- throw0101a 6y ago
  The "Protestant" work ethic existed before Protestentism. See for example: > Andersen et al found that the location monasteries of the Catholic Order of Cistercians, and specifically their density, highly correlated to this work ethic in later centuries;[18] ninety percent of these monasteries were founded before the year 1300 AD. Joseph Henrich found that this correlation extends right up to the twenty-first century.[19] * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protestant_work_ethic#Criticism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protestant_work_ethic#Criticis... * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cistercians https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cistercians
aduitsis 6y ago
Slightly tangential, it's a huge pity that twitter suspended the account of the medieval death bot. https://www.smithjournal.com.au/blogs/history/3011-this-medieval-death-bot-is-posting-the-strange-grisly-ways-people-used-to-die https://www.smithjournal.com.au/blogs/history/3011-this-medi...
nexthash 6y ago
There are a lot of misguided beliefs about the Medieval period arising from a popular Gothic/Romantic revival in the 19th century. The period became known by another name - "the Dark Ages" - and was seen as dark, mysterious, and primitive. That completely got wrong what the Medieval period really was - the transition from Roman imperial rule to early-modern European states, and a small industrial revolution in technology including agriculture and navigation. The popular view of all-powerful, romantic nobility and dumb peasants also comes from this mischaracterization. In reality, the period's instability after the Roman empire fell really made kings and nobles more akin to local warlords playing at Roman customs, and there were exceptions to the rule like prosperous city-republics. Peasant life was also sophisticated, rational, and complex, completely attuned to local weather and crop cycles. A good blog series goes into detail about this here: https://acoup.blog/2020/07/24/collections-bread-how-did-they-make-it-part-i-farmers/ https://acoup.blog/2020/07/24/collections-bread-how-did-they... The important thing to realize is that no matter how difficult it was, how long ago it occurred, and how foreign the customs were for a certain period, people are still people. They have emotions, worries, good days, and struggles. If you take things in perspective and empathize with the people that preceded you on this world, history will lose a lot of its mystery.
- scythe 6y ago
  >there were exceptions to the rule like prosperous city-republics. This seemed to start because of the "compromise" status of Venice and Rome after Charlemagne's conquest of Italy; after that the floodgates opened and other cities tried to get away with it. A thousand years later, the kings have finally been kicked out (mostly).
- 29athrowaway 6y ago
  The #1 misguided belief among the general population is how the Reinassance came to be. And that misguided belief has been driven by revisionism. We are happy to talk about Ancient Greece, but when it comes to talking about the influence of the Umayyad Caliphate in Europe, then people quickly become aggressive and start saying "no, no, no, we don't talk about this here". Why? because the Islamic civilization were our rivals and acknowledging that we owe them our modern lifestyle is highly taboo, especially among people with Conservative views.
marcodiego 6y ago
This is what I like about Pompeii. It allows us to know how "common people" lived. I was impressed by the discovery of thermopolia recently: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/dec/26/exceptionally-well-preserved-snack-bar-unearthed-in-pompeii https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/dec/26/exceptionally-... History told only from the winner's point of view is what makes a lot of people not know that the US lost Vietnam war. Our generation is a bit worse than the previous ones in terms of how we preserve our culture and media. Digital media is way hard to preserve for posterity. That is why I think preserving geocities is so important. Long live the work made by archive.org and project gutenberg; they really deserve our respect.
- mc32 6y ago
  ?? >”... told only from the winner's point of view is what makes a lot of people not know that the US lost Vietnam war.” This is confusing. VN winning means people don’t understand the US losing? Or VN wining meant they wanted others to believe the US won the war? Or the US actually lost but never the less your assertion doesn’t apply?
  - hnick 6y ago
    I think this is actually an interesting point because the US did lose the war but if the winner writes history, then why do so many think they won? You have to look beyond the war. VN is doing well now, but overall the US is far richer and more powerful. So they are the "winner" in that sense and can project their view accordingly.
    - mc32 6y ago
      From the PoV of domino theory, one supposes we did ultimately win with the fall of the USSR and thus the COMINT ceased to be a mortal threat to western socio-economic values.
      - hnick 6y ago
        Yes indeed. Dominoes and Matryoshka dolls - the smaller wars within the overarching cold war, which the US did win, despite losing some of the smaller but deadlier wars.
chmod600 6y ago
I wouldn't have guessed that "those who fight" would have had a very high social status. Can someone explain?
- detaro 6y ago
  With the context given as High Middle Ages, "those who fight" primarily as in knights, with ideas around chivalry etc having strongly developed by then, and at least the "proper" knights being landed etc.
- SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
  What they're referring to here is that medieval European aristocrats were typically military aristocrats, with the power to personally command troops and fight wars in addition to administering their lands. Random farmers who got levied into an army wouldn't have gained high social status from it.
- Lazare 6y ago
  "Those who fight", in this case, means the military aristocracy. Compare to the three estates of the French Ancien Régime (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estates_of_the_realm#Kingdom_of_France https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estates_of_the_realm#Kingdom_o...). The first estate was clergy (aka, "those who prey"). The second estate was nobility, original the "nobility of the sword" (aka "those who fight"), but later including administrators and judges as the "nobility of the robe". Note that the second estate was exempt from most taxes and forced labour, which underscores their power and prestige. And then the third estate was "everyone else", basically peasants, serfs, wage labourers, etc.
  - TheCoelacanth 6y ago
    > The first estate was clergy (aka, "those who prey") It was originally "those who pray", though "prey" may also be appropriate.
  - BrandoElFollito 6y ago
    The etc. also covers all the lower clergy, very different fromnthe higher one. Also a part of the poorer nobility.
at_a_remove 6y ago
When searching about for decent resources to help build a working hypothesis for worldbuilding in D&D, I came across bits on medieval demographics, sort of a "how many peasants do you need for the village to have its own blacksmith" deal. Overall, a very grim view of the situation is a bit like trophic levels in a food web, with the farming peasants being the humble vegetation on which all others grazed, directly or indirectly. And certainly all of those tax records helped delineate just how much land was required. Fascinating stuff.
- azepoi 6y ago
  If you still have the references would you mind sharing links?
asix66 6y ago
Please, please, good people. I am in haste. Who lives in that castle? No one lives there. Then who is your lord? We don't have a lord. What?! I told you. We're an anarcho-syndicalist commune. We take it in turns to act as sort-of-executive officer for the week ... But all the decisions of that officer have to be ratified at a special biweekly meeting...by a simple majority, in the case of purely internal affairs...but by a two thirds majority, in the case of more major... Be quiet! I order you to be quiet! Order, eh? Who does he think he is? I am your king! Well I didn't vote for you. You don't vote for kings! How'd you become king, then? The Lady of the Lake,... her arm clad in the purest shimmering samite, held aloft Excalibur from the bosom of the water signifying by Divine Providence that I, Arthur, was to carry Excalibur. THAT is why I am your king! Listen. Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony. Be quiet! You can't expect to wield supreme executive power just 'cause some watery tart threw a sword at you! Shut up! I mean, if I went 'round saying I was an emperor just because some moistened bint had lobbed a scimitar at me, they'd put me away! Shut up! Will you shut up?! Ah, now we see the violence inherent in the system! Shut up! Oh! Come and see the violence inherent in the system! HELP, HELP, I'M BEING REPRESSED! BLOODY PEASANT!!
- Kelamir 6y ago
  Monty Python: Holy Grail :)
  - Balgair 6y ago
    The scene in question : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t2c-X8HiBng https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t2c-X8HiBng
- second--shift 6y ago
  Upvote - relevant excerpt
Bakary 6y ago
The article draws a distinction between the more modern Marxist definition of feudalism as a stage between slavery and capitalism and the medievalist one that describes "the customs and relationships of an elite who governed ordinary people by virtue of their military, political, and social power." I feel our current model would merit a third definition. The demographic partition is similar to what is described in the article: a very large group of workers, a smaller group of more comfortable workers, and the capital holding elite. The main difference is that workers have a few more rights and a different relationship to the world, the clergy-analog workers have a physical role in the economy (in the sense that unlike with the social function of prayer, machines and systems of production and control have to be actually designed and implemented), and the elites are, due to the increased virtuality of the economy and the skills of the clergy-analog class that assists them, no longer subject to the same type of pressures and responsibilities as their blue-blooded forebears. Perhaps our generation's Thorstein Veblen will tackle the question of identifying what the customs and mechanisms of the current elite are in more detail.
natmaka 6y ago
A major factor is that in many/most area and periods a low-ranking member of the society (even a serf or sometimes a slave) was able to move, for example in order to escape from to much hardship by crossing the domain boundary (in stealth mode). This established a limit to the hardship enforced by a local power: too much of it, and too many will defect, either to the wilderness or to join another lord's domain (for example in some march). This is less and less an option, as technical progress helps enforcing a rule. We sure can read, however for many/most of us it is mainly "Manufacturing Consent" all day long, and thus a way for the establishment to manipulate us.
the-smug-one 6y ago
The medieval period was a fairly long ordeal with large differences over both time and place. Life post-black death in Europe, for example, included a heightened QoL for many as population density was lowered. Many peasants in Europe had their own plot of land but also had to spend some time working his lords' fields. Often the lords had to supplement this with paid work - peasants did not particularly like giving away their labour for free and as such did not work very hard. My source is Patrick Wyman's podcast "Tides of History". He has a PhD in history. He has a Substack also: https://patrickwyman.substack.com/ https://patrickwyman.substack.com/ and another great podcast, "The Fall of Rome". I cannot ensure that my assertions hold for all of Europe :-).
- jimmySixDOF 6y ago
  Bump Up Vote for "Tides of History" - it is an excellent podcast full of rich detail while also covering a lot of ground and explaining the macro picture. https://wondery.com/shows/tides-of-history/ https://wondery.com/shows/tides-of-history/
kashyapc 6y ago
Little over hundred years ago, the dashing Dutch Historian Johan Huizinga wrote a book called: "The Autumn of the Middle Ages", with the subtitle: "A study of the forms of life, thought and art in France and the Netherlands in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries". In it, Huizinga attempts to debunk some myths about the Middle Ages: "[...] Huizinga presents the idea that the exaggerated formality and romanticism of late medieval court society was a defense mechanism against the constantly increasing violence and brutality of general society. He saw the period as one of pessimism, cultural exhaustion, and nostalgia, rather than of rebirth and optimism." The original English translation is hard to read as he refers to many paintings in it, but no pictures. Luckily, on the book's hundred-year anniversary in 2020, a new, English translation (a tad expensive, though) with 300 full-colour illustrations was released.
koonsolo 6y ago
My ancestors were all farmers. I knew my great-grand dad when I was still a boy, he was born in 1900. I'm not a historian, so take my point of view with what I understand of how the "younger generations of farmers" thought. I actually don't think they had it bad. Sure, they worked very hard, but that was their life. The good part is that they were fully self-reliant. They had food, were able to protect themselves, were able to fix anything that was broken, they had a strong community with the other farmers in the neighborhood. In rough times, I think this is very valuable. I'm sure they didn't want to become knights and die in some war. Just because the scholars looked down on them, didn't mean they looked down on themselves, or were all stupid. Because back then you didn't have as much chances to study, I'm sure the intelligence of farmers was very diverse. About 50% of my cousins have a university degree, and most of the rest bachelor. So our genes can't be that stupid ;).
- greypowerOz 6y ago
  were any of your ancestors Pheasant Pluckers?
  - lovemenot 6y ago
    Yes, but just for fun.
michalu 6y ago
If you're interested in the topic of peasants of Europe a great book comes to mind: 'The Peasants' by nobel laureate Władysław Reymont. It describes the life and customs of peasants during the four seasons. We're talking 19th century but the life and customs of peasants in that era haven't changed much except for extra rights they acquired in that century. About the book: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Peasants https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Peasants
mrow84 6y ago
Pretty shameless (though I don't think against the guidelines afaict), but my mother has written a series of novels that have a similar focus in terms of time period and section of society, for anyone who might be interested: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Fortunes-Wheel-Meonbridge-Chronicle-Chronicles-ebook/dp/B07KGF963Y/ref=sr_1_3?dchild=1&keywords=fortune%27s+wheel&qid=1613127594&sr=8-3 https://www.amazon.co.uk/Fortunes-Wheel-Meonbridge-Chronicle...
lou1306 6y ago
In Italy we are lucky to have a very good medieval historian, professor Alessandro Barbero, who has done a great deal of work to popularize "peasant history" among the general public. Most of his talks, are available on YouTube and are being collected in an increasingly popular podcast [1]. Once-obscure topics like the Ciompi revolt in Florence, the French Jacquerie, or the English peasants' revolt, are basically achieving memetic status. The podcast is only in Italian, but it could be a useful tool to learn the language :) [1] https://podcasts.apple.com/podcast/podcast-di-alessandro-barbero-lezioni-e-conferenze/id1501956064?l=en https://podcasts.apple.com/podcast/podcast-di-alessandro-bar...
- bildung 6y ago
  There is also Ferdinand Braudel, who published 3 works about peasant live in the 15th to 18th century: "The Structures of Everyday Life", "The Wheels of Commerce" and "The Perspective of the World". I found them very interesting, they depict normal days for different trades and classes and the changes that occured to them over the centuries.
  - BrandoElFollito 6y ago
    Le Goff wrote a lot about everyday medieval life too. His books are very readable

181 points by diodorus 6y ago

>monks and students enjoyed jokes that portrayed peasants as ludicrously dumb and foolish; and priests, friars, and bishops preached sermons that depicted “those who work” as objects of pity, charity, and disgust. Even Piers Plowman, a sympathetic portrayal of rural life, portrayed the peasant’s lot as hard and pitiable. The more things change. The more things stay the same.

airstrike 6y ago

> Clues about how privileged people in the Middle Ages regarded peasants can be found in their courtly songs, sarcastic proverbs, nasty jokes, and pious sermons. Knights and ladies were fond of songs known as pastourelles that told, among other things, about how easy it was for knights to have sex with peasant women or, failing that, to rape them; monks and students enjoyed jokes that portrayed peasants as ludicrously dumb and foolish; and priests, friars, and bishops preached sermons that depicted “those who work” as objects of pity, charity, and disgust. Even Piers Plowman, a sympathetic portrayal of rural life, portrayed the peasant’s lot as hard and pitiable. These literary texts are useful for understanding the often astoundingly negative attitudes of elites toward peasants, but they tell little about the peasants themselves. They also seem useful to contrast the American / protestant view of work as the path to salvation with the European / catholic view of work as something pitiful EDIT: See e.g. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Protestant_Ethic_and_the_Spirit_of_Capitalism https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Protestant_Ethic_and_the...

michaelsbradley 6y ago
That... doesn't make a lot of sense, at least on face value. In the Protestant view, your work (human effort) has no effect on your salvation. In the Catholic view, it has a lot to do with it. For a modern review see Laborem Exercens: http://www.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_14091981_laborem-exercens.html http://www.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/encyclicals/do....
- jariel 6y ago
  I don't think it's to do with salvation so much as the cultural views towards people. Hearty, independent farmers, strong communitarian values, some degree of independence, faith and fealty are to be admired as virtuous, a form of 'working nobility'. I don't think the contrasting view of them as 'lowly' has anything to do with faith or religion but rather just a measure of perspective in culture. Ancient world vs Newer World. My grandparents were farmers, and were amazing people. I never worried about telling people that in North America. In many other parts of the world, it's the equivalent of saying "my grandparents were illiterate, stupid, servile, serfs". In many parts of the world, a few generations ago it was either 'Rich and Powerful' or 'a Stupid, Servile, Plebe' and there really wasn't much in between, and that to have Money, Wealth and Power was to be something inherently admirable in and of itself.
  - michaelsbradley 6y ago
    Fair enough. I was responding specifically to the parent comment: "...contrast the American / protestant view of work as the path to salvation with the European / catholic view of work as something pitiful" I think there's still more to understand re: "cultural view towards people" (the dynamics behind those views) in relation to a point that's central to the Catholic ethos operative then and now: Christ crucified, the power of God and the wisdom of God (cf. 1 Corinthians 1:18-31).
  - loopz 6y ago
    America was about getting to own land, for refugee serfs that had no opportunity to land and education.
    - jariel 6y ago
      Yes, that's fundamental to it. And so many things.
- ardy42 6y ago
  >> They also seem useful to contrast the American / protestant view of work as the path to salvation with the European / catholic view of work as something pitiful > That... doesn't make a lot of sense, at least on face value. In the Protestant view, your work (human effort) has no effect on your salvation. In the Catholic view, it has a lot to do with it. I think he got it wrong. IIRC, the "Protestant work ethic" comes from a belief one's work ethic and success is proof of salivation, not the cause of it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protestant_work_ethic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protestant_work_ethic: > Since it was impossible to know who was predestined, the notion developed that it might be possible to discern that a person was elect (predestined) by observing their way of life. Hard work and frugality were thought to be two important consequences of being one of the elect. Protestants were thus attracted to these qualities and supposed to strive for reaching them.
pomian 6y ago
Is this a British centric view of history? It seems very one sided...
- wombatmobile 6y ago
  > We can especially study peasants in England because the archives there are especially full. In some cases, the superiority of English archives stems from the more careful record-keeping of its administrators, but, in most cases, it has been a matter of survival through the centuries. Thanks to a strong legal system, a relatively stable social order, and a hefty dose of luck, England’s medieval archives have survived especially well. In France, for example, many medieval archives were destroyed during the French Revolution, and in Scotland, untold thousands of state documents were lost when a ship carrying them sank in 1661. History is built on evidence, and if there is little evidence, historians have much less to study and much less to say.
  - hnedeotes 6y ago
    I found it deeply ironic that you're replying to this: >Is this a British centric view of history? It seems very one sided... reply With that quote. This phrase: >In some cases, the superiority of English archives stems from the more careful record-keeping of its administrators, but, in most cases, it has been a matter of survival through the centuries Look at the words and order in which they appear "superiority", "careful record-keeping of its administrators". Starting from the lesser important cause to the main one, luck. In fact what it's saying is: > We can especially study peasants in England because the archives there are especially full, stemming from the simply fact that they survived through time, whereas in many other places they didn't due to many diverse factors" It goes on on the following phrase: > Thanks to a strong legal system, a relatively stable social order, and a hefty dose of luck, England’s medieval archives have survived especially well. Again the wording and the order, luck is the last item, although in the writer's defence, they wrote "hefty dose of luck". Nonetheless, when you read that phrase the first thing that is imprinted is the "strong legal system", "relative stable social order", and lastly luck no matter how hefty. And this is proved by the following remarks about how in France and Scotland a presumably high number of documents were lost, which invalidates the supposed "careful record-keeping" being a relevant reason. There's other examples where sacks, destruction or natural phenomena destroyed complete archives of many states, in Europe and elsewhere. This is not to say that the conclusions of the article are wrong or that in fact English book keeping wasn't good or even better than any of the other mentioned here, in some, a few, many or all cases, it's just the way it's written. *edit formatting
sn41 6y ago
Isn't this the work by Max Weber? The main idea here is that predestination of Calvin believed that certain people were predestined for salvation, and others were not. But the implication is that material wealth is an indication of whether one is to be saved or not. Weber points out that even though there were always wealthy classes all over the world - he is quite eclectic and treats ancient India, Babylon, China and Japan - modern capitalism and earning money for the sake of earning money, not for enjoying resulting luxuries, is Protestant in nature. I am not an expert on Catholic viewpoint, but many religions (other than Calvinism as Weber sees it) tend to see wealth as a hindrance to salvation - e.g. camel through the eye of the needle etc. But the doctrine of karma etc. do tend to emphasize work for work's sake. So I am not sure I completely agree with Weber (he has works on Hinduism, Judaism etc. which are also insightful and unique takes on religion).
anthk 6y ago
I am from Spain, some of oldest dirty jokes/limericks date back to Middle Ages, too.
throw0101a 6y ago
The "Protestant" work ethic existed before Protestentism. See for example: > Andersen et al found that the location monasteries of the Catholic Order of Cistercians, and specifically their density, highly correlated to this work ethic in later centuries;[18] ninety percent of these monasteries were founded before the year 1300 AD. Joseph Henrich found that this correlation extends right up to the twenty-first century.[19] * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protestant_work_ethic#Criticism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protestant_work_ethic#Criticis... * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cistercians https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cistercians

aduitsis 6y ago

Slightly tangential, it's a huge pity that twitter suspended the account of the medieval death bot. https://www.smithjournal.com.au/blogs/history/3011-this-medieval-death-bot-is-posting-the-strange-grisly-ways-people-used-to-die https://www.smithjournal.com.au/blogs/history/3011-this-medi...

nexthash 6y ago

There are a lot of misguided beliefs about the Medieval period arising from a popular Gothic/Romantic revival in the 19th century. The period became known by another name - "the Dark Ages" - and was seen as dark, mysterious, and primitive. That completely got wrong what the Medieval period really was - the transition from Roman imperial rule to early-modern European states, and a small industrial revolution in technology including agriculture and navigation. The popular view of all-powerful, romantic nobility and dumb peasants also comes from this mischaracterization. In reality, the period's instability after the Roman empire fell really made kings and nobles more akin to local warlords playing at Roman customs, and there were exceptions to the rule like prosperous city-republics. Peasant life was also sophisticated, rational, and complex, completely attuned to local weather and crop cycles. A good blog series goes into detail about this here: https://acoup.blog/2020/07/24/collections-bread-how-did-they-make-it-part-i-farmers/ https://acoup.blog/2020/07/24/collections-bread-how-did-they... The important thing to realize is that no matter how difficult it was, how long ago it occurred, and how foreign the customs were for a certain period, people are still people. They have emotions, worries, good days, and struggles. If you take things in perspective and empathize with the people that preceded you on this world, history will lose a lot of its mystery.

scythe 6y ago
>there were exceptions to the rule like prosperous city-republics. This seemed to start because of the "compromise" status of Venice and Rome after Charlemagne's conquest of Italy; after that the floodgates opened and other cities tried to get away with it. A thousand years later, the kings have finally been kicked out (mostly).
29athrowaway 6y ago
The #1 misguided belief among the general population is how the Reinassance came to be. And that misguided belief has been driven by revisionism. We are happy to talk about Ancient Greece, but when it comes to talking about the influence of the Umayyad Caliphate in Europe, then people quickly become aggressive and start saying "no, no, no, we don't talk about this here". Why? because the Islamic civilization were our rivals and acknowledging that we owe them our modern lifestyle is highly taboo, especially among people with Conservative views.

marcodiego 6y ago

This is what I like about Pompeii. It allows us to know how "common people" lived. I was impressed by the discovery of thermopolia recently: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/dec/26/exceptionally-well-preserved-snack-bar-unearthed-in-pompeii https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/dec/26/exceptionally-... History told only from the winner's point of view is what makes a lot of people not know that the US lost Vietnam war. Our generation is a bit worse than the previous ones in terms of how we preserve our culture and media. Digital media is way hard to preserve for posterity. That is why I think preserving geocities is so important. Long live the work made by archive.org and project gutenberg; they really deserve our respect.

mc32 6y ago
?? >”... told only from the winner's point of view is what makes a lot of people not know that the US lost Vietnam war.” This is confusing. VN winning means people don’t understand the US losing? Or VN wining meant they wanted others to believe the US won the war? Or the US actually lost but never the less your assertion doesn’t apply?
- hnick 6y ago
  I think this is actually an interesting point because the US did lose the war but if the winner writes history, then why do so many think they won? You have to look beyond the war. VN is doing well now, but overall the US is far richer and more powerful. So they are the "winner" in that sense and can project their view accordingly.
  - mc32 6y ago
    From the PoV of domino theory, one supposes we did ultimately win with the fall of the USSR and thus the COMINT ceased to be a mortal threat to western socio-economic values.
    - hnick 6y ago
      Yes indeed. Dominoes and Matryoshka dolls - the smaller wars within the overarching cold war, which the US did win, despite losing some of the smaller but deadlier wars.

chmod600 6y ago

I wouldn't have guessed that "those who fight" would have had a very high social status. Can someone explain?

detaro 6y ago
With the context given as High Middle Ages, "those who fight" primarily as in knights, with ideas around chivalry etc having strongly developed by then, and at least the "proper" knights being landed etc.
SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
What they're referring to here is that medieval European aristocrats were typically military aristocrats, with the power to personally command troops and fight wars in addition to administering their lands. Random farmers who got levied into an army wouldn't have gained high social status from it.
Lazare 6y ago
"Those who fight", in this case, means the military aristocracy. Compare to the three estates of the French Ancien Régime (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estates_of_the_realm#Kingdom_of_France https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estates_of_the_realm#Kingdom_o...). The first estate was clergy (aka, "those who prey"). The second estate was nobility, original the "nobility of the sword" (aka "those who fight"), but later including administrators and judges as the "nobility of the robe". Note that the second estate was exempt from most taxes and forced labour, which underscores their power and prestige. And then the third estate was "everyone else", basically peasants, serfs, wage labourers, etc.
- TheCoelacanth 6y ago
  > The first estate was clergy (aka, "those who prey") It was originally "those who pray", though "prey" may also be appropriate.
- BrandoElFollito 6y ago
  The etc. also covers all the lower clergy, very different fromnthe higher one. Also a part of the poorer nobility.

at_a_remove 6y ago

When searching about for decent resources to help build a working hypothesis for worldbuilding in D&D, I came across bits on medieval demographics, sort of a "how many peasants do you need for the village to have its own blacksmith" deal. Overall, a very grim view of the situation is a bit like trophic levels in a food web, with the farming peasants being the humble vegetation on which all others grazed, directly or indirectly. And certainly all of those tax records helped delineate just how much land was required. Fascinating stuff.

azepoi 6y ago
If you still have the references would you mind sharing links?

asix66 6y ago

Please, please, good people. I am in haste. Who lives in that castle? No one lives there. Then who is your lord? We don't have a lord. What?! I told you. We're an anarcho-syndicalist commune. We take it in turns to act as sort-of-executive officer for the week ... But all the decisions of that officer have to be ratified at a special biweekly meeting...by a simple majority, in the case of purely internal affairs...but by a two thirds majority, in the case of more major... Be quiet! I order you to be quiet! Order, eh? Who does he think he is? I am your king! Well I didn't vote for you. You don't vote for kings! How'd you become king, then? The Lady of the Lake,... her arm clad in the purest shimmering samite, held aloft Excalibur from the bosom of the water signifying by Divine Providence that I, Arthur, was to carry Excalibur. THAT is why I am your king! Listen. Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony. Be quiet! You can't expect to wield supreme executive power just 'cause some watery tart threw a sword at you! Shut up! I mean, if I went 'round saying I was an emperor just because some moistened bint had lobbed a scimitar at me, they'd put me away! Shut up! Will you shut up?! Ah, now we see the violence inherent in the system! Shut up! Oh! Come and see the violence inherent in the system! HELP, HELP, I'M BEING REPRESSED! BLOODY PEASANT!!

Kelamir 6y ago
Monty Python: Holy Grail :)
- Balgair 6y ago
  The scene in question : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t2c-X8HiBng https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t2c-X8HiBng
second--shift 6y ago
Upvote - relevant excerpt

Bakary 6y ago

The article draws a distinction between the more modern Marxist definition of feudalism as a stage between slavery and capitalism and the medievalist one that describes "the customs and relationships of an elite who governed ordinary people by virtue of their military, political, and social power." I feel our current model would merit a third definition. The demographic partition is similar to what is described in the article: a very large group of workers, a smaller group of more comfortable workers, and the capital holding elite. The main difference is that workers have a few more rights and a different relationship to the world, the clergy-analog workers have a physical role in the economy (in the sense that unlike with the social function of prayer, machines and systems of production and control have to be actually designed and implemented), and the elites are, due to the increased virtuality of the economy and the skills of the clergy-analog class that assists them, no longer subject to the same type of pressures and responsibilities as their blue-blooded forebears. Perhaps our generation's Thorstein Veblen will tackle the question of identifying what the customs and mechanisms of the current elite are in more detail.

natmaka 6y ago

A major factor is that in many/most area and periods a low-ranking member of the society (even a serf or sometimes a slave) was able to move, for example in order to escape from to much hardship by crossing the domain boundary (in stealth mode). This established a limit to the hardship enforced by a local power: too much of it, and too many will defect, either to the wilderness or to join another lord's domain (for example in some march). This is less and less an option, as technical progress helps enforcing a rule. We sure can read, however for many/most of us it is mainly "Manufacturing Consent" all day long, and thus a way for the establishment to manipulate us.

the-smug-one 6y ago

The medieval period was a fairly long ordeal with large differences over both time and place. Life post-black death in Europe, for example, included a heightened QoL for many as population density was lowered. Many peasants in Europe had their own plot of land but also had to spend some time working his lords' fields. Often the lords had to supplement this with paid work - peasants did not particularly like giving away their labour for free and as such did not work very hard. My source is Patrick Wyman's podcast "Tides of History". He has a PhD in history. He has a Substack also: https://patrickwyman.substack.com/ https://patrickwyman.substack.com/ and another great podcast, "The Fall of Rome". I cannot ensure that my assertions hold for all of Europe :-).

jimmySixDOF 6y ago
Bump Up Vote for "Tides of History" - it is an excellent podcast full of rich detail while also covering a lot of ground and explaining the macro picture. https://wondery.com/shows/tides-of-history/ https://wondery.com/shows/tides-of-history/

kashyapc 6y ago

Little over hundred years ago, the dashing Dutch Historian Johan Huizinga wrote a book called: "The Autumn of the Middle Ages", with the subtitle: "A study of the forms of life, thought and art in France and the Netherlands in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries". In it, Huizinga attempts to debunk some myths about the Middle Ages: "[...] Huizinga presents the idea that the exaggerated formality and romanticism of late medieval court society was a defense mechanism against the constantly increasing violence and brutality of general society. He saw the period as one of pessimism, cultural exhaustion, and nostalgia, rather than of rebirth and optimism." The original English translation is hard to read as he refers to many paintings in it, but no pictures. Luckily, on the book's hundred-year anniversary in 2020, a new, English translation (a tad expensive, though) with 300 full-colour illustrations was released.

koonsolo 6y ago

My ancestors were all farmers. I knew my great-grand dad when I was still a boy, he was born in 1900. I'm not a historian, so take my point of view with what I understand of how the "younger generations of farmers" thought. I actually don't think they had it bad. Sure, they worked very hard, but that was their life. The good part is that they were fully self-reliant. They had food, were able to protect themselves, were able to fix anything that was broken, they had a strong community with the other farmers in the neighborhood. In rough times, I think this is very valuable. I'm sure they didn't want to become knights and die in some war. Just because the scholars looked down on them, didn't mean they looked down on themselves, or were all stupid. Because back then you didn't have as much chances to study, I'm sure the intelligence of farmers was very diverse. About 50% of my cousins have a university degree, and most of the rest bachelor. So our genes can't be that stupid ;).

greypowerOz 6y ago
were any of your ancestors Pheasant Pluckers?
- lovemenot 6y ago
  Yes, but just for fun.

michalu 6y ago

If you're interested in the topic of peasants of Europe a great book comes to mind: 'The Peasants' by nobel laureate Władysław Reymont. It describes the life and customs of peasants during the four seasons. We're talking 19th century but the life and customs of peasants in that era haven't changed much except for extra rights they acquired in that century. About the book: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Peasants https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Peasants

mrow84 6y ago

Pretty shameless (though I don't think against the guidelines afaict), but my mother has written a series of novels that have a similar focus in terms of time period and section of society, for anyone who might be interested: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Fortunes-Wheel-Meonbridge-Chronicle-Chronicles-ebook/dp/B07KGF963Y/ref=sr_1_3?dchild=1&keywords=fortune%27s+wheel&qid=1613127594&sr=8-3 https://www.amazon.co.uk/Fortunes-Wheel-Meonbridge-Chronicle...

lou1306 6y ago

In Italy we are lucky to have a very good medieval historian, professor Alessandro Barbero, who has done a great deal of work to popularize "peasant history" among the general public. Most of his talks, are available on YouTube and are being collected in an increasingly popular podcast [1]. Once-obscure topics like the Ciompi revolt in Florence, the French Jacquerie, or the English peasants' revolt, are basically achieving memetic status. The podcast is only in Italian, but it could be a useful tool to learn the language :) [1] https://podcasts.apple.com/podcast/podcast-di-alessandro-barbero-lezioni-e-conferenze/id1501956064?l=en https://podcasts.apple.com/podcast/podcast-di-alessandro-bar...

bildung 6y ago
There is also Ferdinand Braudel, who published 3 works about peasant live in the 15th to 18th century: "The Structures of Everyday Life", "The Wheels of Commerce" and "The Perspective of the World". I found them very interesting, they depict normal days for different trades and classes and the changes that occured to them over the centuries.
- BrandoElFollito 6y ago
  Le Goff wrote a lot about everyday medieval life too. His books are very readable