> I'm not sure why exactly subsistence farming households would have to manufacture everything -- farmer can sell produce on the market and buy stuff That does

> I'm not sure why exactly subsistence farming households would have to manufacture everything -- farmer can sell produce on the market and buy stuff That doesn't lower the total amount of labor required. Someone still has to make the garments. Garments were also very expensive, and most farmers wouldn't have had enough surplus crops to purchase them. > more modern (Middle ages) estimate would give you 3 hours per day whole year by one person That's after the invention of the spinning wheel, which didn't exist for ~90% of the Middle Ages. The second estimate from just before the invention of the spinning wheel (1300s) is close to the ancient estimate. > Also keep in mind that those farmer households would not change their clothes every year (and that's an understatement) One garment per year. That doesn't mean they throw away the old garment. They might keep it as a spare or repurpose it for other uses. He also justifies this estimate based on historical data for people who were issued garments by their employers (slaves and soldiers). Cato the Elder recommended issuing slaves one garment every two years, and was infamous for being cruel and parsimonious towards his slaves, so that is probably about the bare minimum for subsistence. Soldiers in the Roman Republic were issued two garments per year. Assuming that subsistence farmers aimed for a standard of living above that of the most poorly treated slaves seems like a reasonable assumption.