4 ms·

> However the main reason to switch from hand mills to windmills was that it was far easier for the miller to collect taxes when the grain was milled than for t

> However the main reason to switch from hand mills to windmills was that it was far easier for the miller to collect taxes when the grain was milled than for tax collectors to go to every peasant and collect taxes there. I think you’re mixing cause (larger windmills are more efficient, making it a win to centralize them) with effect (that makes it easier to tax flour production). If that were the main reason, we would have stories about people clandestinely milling at home. I’m not aware of any. (I also think, but am not sure, milling already was centralized before the introduction of wind power)

scarmig 4y ago
It'd be interesting to see if the initial windmills when introduced were more efficient, post-tax and capex, than traditional methods. There's a parallel with grains: staples like rice and wheat are more legible to states than other alternatives like legumes, tubers, and starch plants, even though the latter were comparable in terms of calories generated by unit labor. E.g. many roots are buried and hidden from tax collectors. States which enforced cultivation of the legible grains had a greater tax base and outcompeted those that didn't.
- adwn 4y ago
  That's not very convincing. Before the introduction of the potato, there were no below-ground alternatives that were superior to cereals in Europe and Northern Africa. > E.g. many roots are buried and hidden from tax collectors. Those roots tend to be attached to green stuff that's above ground and very visible. Why should that be any less legible to tax collectors than wheat or rice?
  - scarmig 4y ago
    > Those roots tend to be attached to green stuff that's above ground and very visible. Why should that be any less legible to tax collectors than wheat or rice? It's a combination of factors. Cereals like wheat and rice tend to ripen seasonally and simultaneously. They do so visibly, and must be harvested soon after. So a state sends its tax collectors around when the grains are ready to be harvested, and the amount that was generated is immediately visible. They also keep well: tubers go bad relatively quickly (and can be kept underground until actually needed for consumption), while rice and wheat can be transported over long distances and times with an order of magnitude less loss. Consider the case of the Incas. As a civilization, they relied on two crops for calories and nutrition: maize and potatoes. Despite that, efforts at taxation primarily focused on maize, because it was so much better suited for taxes and commerce (though they did eventually invent a way to freeze dry potatoes).
stewbrew 4y ago
I assume people didn't have mills at home for the same reason most people of today don't have full blown data centers at home. People did have mortars though like today's people have PCs and smartphones. I think you're wrong to assume that of two things that co-evolved, one thing had to cause the other.
- dllthomas 4y ago
  People didn't have giant millstones at home, but (IIUC) had various forms of handmill at home at various times and places. Interestingly, per https://acoup.blog/2022/07/29/collections-logistics-how-did-they-do-it-part-ii-foraging https://acoup.blog/2022/07/29/collections-logistics-how-did-... several Mediterranean cultures equipped their soldiers with handmills, with the Romans also including sickles so they could process grain from the fields they were marching near, allowing an earlier campaign season then were they forced to wait for it to be harvested.
- Gordonjcp 4y ago
  You'd have a quern at home, at least in Scotland, probably most of England too.
dllthomas 4y ago
> If that were the main reason, we would have stories about people clandestinely milling at home. I’m not aware of any. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quern-stone#Laws_against_use https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quern-stone#Laws_against_use Laws against a thing often indicate that it was common enough to be a problem, although there are exceptions.
- Someone 4y ago
  Thanks!
insane_dreamer 4y ago
Home mills -- that were small enough to keep hidden from a surprise inspection -- might be fine for small amounts but unlikely efficient enough for full harvests.
- galt_drakkor 4y ago
  Flour spoils much faster then unmilled grain. So the bulk of the grain would always be left as grain for storage. Armies would be the ones who would want to bulk mill an entire harvest taken from a region. For those without access to windmills, the daily grind would produce flour/ meal for that day.
jlawson 4y ago
People did clandestinely mill at home. It was treated as a serious crime. There are specific historical laws about this and the punishments were pretty severe. It was something the lords were quite concerned about.

scarmig 4y ago

It'd be interesting to see if the initial windmills when introduced were more efficient, post-tax and capex, than traditional methods. There's a parallel with grains: staples like rice and wheat are more legible to states than other alternatives like legumes, tubers, and starch plants, even though the latter were comparable in terms of calories generated by unit labor. E.g. many roots are buried and hidden from tax collectors. States which enforced cultivation of the legible grains had a greater tax base and outcompeted those that didn't.

adwn 4y ago
That's not very convincing. Before the introduction of the potato, there were no below-ground alternatives that were superior to cereals in Europe and Northern Africa. > E.g. many roots are buried and hidden from tax collectors. Those roots tend to be attached to green stuff that's above ground and very visible. Why should that be any less legible to tax collectors than wheat or rice?
- scarmig 4y ago
  > Those roots tend to be attached to green stuff that's above ground and very visible. Why should that be any less legible to tax collectors than wheat or rice? It's a combination of factors. Cereals like wheat and rice tend to ripen seasonally and simultaneously. They do so visibly, and must be harvested soon after. So a state sends its tax collectors around when the grains are ready to be harvested, and the amount that was generated is immediately visible. They also keep well: tubers go bad relatively quickly (and can be kept underground until actually needed for consumption), while rice and wheat can be transported over long distances and times with an order of magnitude less loss. Consider the case of the Incas. As a civilization, they relied on two crops for calories and nutrition: maize and potatoes. Despite that, efforts at taxation primarily focused on maize, because it was so much better suited for taxes and commerce (though they did eventually invent a way to freeze dry potatoes).

stewbrew 4y ago

I assume people didn't have mills at home for the same reason most people of today don't have full blown data centers at home. People did have mortars though like today's people have PCs and smartphones. I think you're wrong to assume that of two things that co-evolved, one thing had to cause the other.

dllthomas 4y ago
People didn't have giant millstones at home, but (IIUC) had various forms of handmill at home at various times and places. Interestingly, per https://acoup.blog/2022/07/29/collections-logistics-how-did-they-do-it-part-ii-foraging https://acoup.blog/2022/07/29/collections-logistics-how-did-... several Mediterranean cultures equipped their soldiers with handmills, with the Romans also including sickles so they could process grain from the fields they were marching near, allowing an earlier campaign season then were they forced to wait for it to be harvested.
Gordonjcp 4y ago
You'd have a quern at home, at least in Scotland, probably most of England too.

dllthomas 4y ago

> If that were the main reason, we would have stories about people clandestinely milling at home. I’m not aware of any. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quern-stone#Laws_against_use https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quern-stone#Laws_against_use Laws against a thing often indicate that it was common enough to be a problem, although there are exceptions.

Someone 4y ago
Thanks!

insane_dreamer 4y ago

Home mills -- that were small enough to keep hidden from a surprise inspection -- might be fine for small amounts but unlikely efficient enough for full harvests.

galt_drakkor 4y ago
Flour spoils much faster then unmilled grain. So the bulk of the grain would always be left as grain for storage. Armies would be the ones who would want to bulk mill an entire harvest taken from a region. For those without access to windmills, the daily grind would produce flour/ meal for that day.

jlawson 4y ago

People did clandestinely mill at home. It was treated as a serious crime. There are specific historical laws about this and the punishments were pretty severe. It was something the lords were quite concerned about.