3 ms·
I find codezero's lack of historical perspective rather uninformed and somewhat naïve. "how can you afford..." People at the time didn't always have the money
by 205guy 12y ago
I find codezero's lack of historical perspective rather uninformed and somewhat naïve.
"how can you afford..." People at the time didn't always have the money (or trade goods) and some lived in squalor (not all food/shelter/clothing needs met).
"hand made items like clothing..." Everything was handmade, so it was the norm. A shirt would be essentially worth the food required during the time it took you or the village weaver/tailor to make it. Fine clothes, such as those worn by nobles were notoriously expensive, often with a person's wardrobe being worth half of their entire estate (including land and buildings).
"which requires precious natural resources..." Many resources were more bountiful at the time, with more open areas and less population. Commons and wilderness closer by gave resources for the time to gather them.
"and time to create..." People had more time, without modern leisure pursuits. When you eat the subsistence level, you spend whatever time it takes to meet your needs (food, shelter, fuel, clothing).
But all these details were dependent on the time and place you're interested in. Feudal Europe had peasants living in squalor while the nobles controlled the land/resources and got rich off peasant labor. In places like the Pacific Northwest of North America, the salmon run was so abundant and nutritious that food was not lacking and I imagine people had time to hunt for furs and sew them into clothing before winter, as well as develop other arts and crafts.
- PhasmaFelis 12y ago> I find codezero's lack of historical perspective rather uninformed and somewhat naïve. When someone admits that they don't understand something, it's generally considered gauche to insult them for it.
- meepmorp 12y agoBut how else are we to feel superior to others?
- 205guy 12y agoFair enough, I was thinking I was being a bit harsh. And I applaud someone who wants to delve in to a realistic analysis of history. Yet... I just couldn't help notice a disconnect. It would be like me asking on HN why, if tech salaries in SF are so high, why aren't all tech workers living like millionaires in the city. Anyone who's been to SF knows the situation, and anyone on HN must've heard about it. And I am writing about the tech industry on the Internet, so I could quickly google the topic and read some interesting analysis. But I suppose it's taken me years of curiosity driven reading, and also some detachment and travel to other cultures to start to form a picture of how people may have lived. So I apologize for being rude. I remain fascinated by the idea that humans have been "modern" (with the same and complete facilities for learning, reasoning, and complexity) for 10,000 years, perhaps even 50,000. They may not have had metal, they may not have had writing, but they had societies and intellectual lives just as complex as ours. They were not sitting around a campfire grunting, they were laughing, worshipping, making art, scheming, fighting, romancing, and surviving in many ways just like we do. I always think that a clan leader from the Stone Age would totally understand office politics.
- codezero 12y agoI'd love more perspective. If you have any good sources that I can read on the subject, let me know. Like I said above and in other comments, I'm most interested in the entire system that revolved around something as simple as getting a shirt, or garment, from raw materials of the garment to the materials of the tools used to weave the raw materials, to the tools needed to build the tools used to weave the... etc... it's really interesting and obviously since I didn't live back then and don't have access to any personal accounts of medieval peasants, I'm intensely curious about any information you have!