[HN Gopher] How to Manage a Dark Ages Estate
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       How to Manage a Dark Ages Estate
        
       Author : hnmullany
       Score  : 91 points
       Date   : 2021-03-29 11:27 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.le.ac.uk)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.le.ac.uk)
        
       | AnotherGoodName wrote:
       | > they shall accept no gifts from them, neither a horse nor an
       | ox, nor a cow, nor a pig, nor a sheep, nor a piglet, nor a lamb,
       | nor anything other than bottles of wine, vegetables, fruit,
       | chickens and eggs.
       | 
       | Remarkably similar to most corporate anti-corruption policies of
       | today. I've generally seen wording "No gifts over $50". So a
       | bottle of wine is fine as a gesture but anything that's expensive
       | enough that it likely influences decision making isn't allowed.
        
         | foobarian wrote:
         | I find it fascinating how much further that society went toward
         | looking like a corporation. It's almost as if everyone born was
         | an employee by default, and the referenced "freemen" were the
         | exception, being non-employees. And this document could be an
         | acquisition contract where the acquired CEO tried to keep his
         | company intact under the new owner (hence the words about not
         | allowing the new owner to reassign people to different jobs).
        
           | phone8675309 wrote:
           | > It's almost as if everyone born was an employee by default,
           | and the referenced "freemen" were the exception, being non-
           | employees.
           | 
           | I don't know if you're joking, but
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feudalism was a thing shortly
           | after this text
        
       | pradn wrote:
       | The term "Dark Ages" is not used by historians any more. And it's
       | doubly odd because these rules, from Charlemagne's times, were
       | the very cause of the "Carolingian renaissance" of the eighth and
       | ninth centuries.
        
         | elliekelly wrote:
         | Is there a good source where I can read more about this or can
         | you elaborate a bit? Why don't they use the term and what term
         | is preferred instead?
         | 
         | Edit: Oddly enough, the Wikipedia article[1] includes a few
         | sentences/references about how and why the term is no longer
         | considered accurate by historians (it "mischaracterises the
         | Middle Ages as a time of violence and backwardness") yet
         | Wikipedia continues to use the term "Dark Ages" as the article
         | title.
         | 
         | [1]https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Ages_(historiography)
        
           | pradn wrote:
           | The article simply uses the term in the title so it can
           | discuss it.
           | 
           | Historians prefer the Middle Ages or the Medieval Period.
           | Since this is relatively Europe-centric, historians are
           | trying to go in the direction of "global Medieval studies",
           | to form connections among various regions of the world.
           | 
           | Our periodization is largely Eurocentric. The very long
           | lineage of metallic/tool-based terms like the Bronze Age run
           | into the obvious problem that bronze arrived in different
           | regions at different times.
        
             | Karawebnetwork wrote:
             | > The article simply uses the term in the title so it can
             | discuss it.
             | 
             | The words "Dark Ages" do not appear in the text. This is
             | the HN post title.
        
               | pradn wrote:
               | Oh, I thought they were talking about the Wikipedia
               | article's title.
        
               | Karawebnetwork wrote:
               | I think you're right. It was a bit vague and I thought it
               | was about the article's title itself.
        
           | zippy5 wrote:
           | If the people looking to learning about this subject have the
           | "dark ages" misconception, is it so bad to make it easy to
           | find via search and then explaining the nuances of the
           | misnomer?
        
           | jkingsbery wrote:
           | At the risk of stating something obvious, Wikipedia's article
           | on the Carolingian Renaissance is a good place to start:
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carolingian_Renaissance
           | 
           | The term I've seen in books I've read lately is "Early Middle
           | Ages" (see
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_Ages#Early_Middle_Ages).
           | 
           | "Dark Ages" is arguably applicable to the time around
           | 500-800, although the other problem is that there's also
           | another commonly referred-to time period known as the Dark
           | Ages, the Greek Dark Ages, from around 1100 BC - 750 BC.
        
           | jcranmer wrote:
           | > yet Wikipedia continues to use the term "Dark Ages" as the
           | article title.
           | 
           | The article is about the history of the term "Dark Ages", why
           | shouldn't that be the the title? If you go by link counts,
           | there are 741 links to the Dark Ages page but 2582 to the
           | Early Middle Ages instead.
           | 
           | > Why don't they use the term and what term is preferred
           | instead?
           | 
           | "Dark Ages" is itself somewhat ambiguous. In its original
           | incarnation, it referred to the entirety of the time between
           | the "Fall of Rome" (itself hard to specify) and the
           | Renaissance, as its early users saw Rome as the pinnacle of
           | human civilization and looked down on everything following
           | the end of Rome as unimportant, at least until they
           | themselves were bringing back the splendor of Roman
           | civilization. Later scholars were instead nostalgic for the
           | High or Late Medieval civilization, so instead they narrowed
           | the term to exclude their favored era, resulting in it
           | referring to only the Early Middle Ages (to ~1000). Some
           | people go further still and exclude the Carolingian
           | Renaissance from the Dark Ages, pushing its end date further
           | still to 800--there's no neat alternative term for this
           | range, but Age of Migrations covers much of the themes.
           | 
           | In any case, periodization of that time period of European
           | history is immensely challenging. The decline of the Roman
           | Empire brings with it a decline in the written record and our
           | knowledge of events in the period diminishes drastically,
           | only recovering with the Carolingian Renaissance.
           | Furthermore, the Roman Empire doesn't fall in an easy
           | cataclysmic moment (there's no Battle of Hastings here), but
           | instead disintegrates at different rates in different parts
           | of Europe, with the final vestige only falling in 1475
           | (Principality of Theorodo). Meanwhile, there are several
           | overlapping themes going on: the rise of Post-Roman kingdoms
           | (such as the Franks and the Lombards), a mass migration of
           | peoples (including the Anglo-Saxons and various Slavic
           | groups), the Viking Age, the birth of Islam, the Great Schism
           | between Eastern and Western Christianity (and other schisms
           | within those sects!). For the boundary between the Middle
           | Ages and the Early Modern, you can point to "about 1500" and
           | note that several major changes happen about the same time
           | (including total conversion to gunpowder weapons, Protestant
           | Reformation, discovery of the New World, and the Fall of
           | Constantinople)--that doesn't exist between Antiquity and the
           | Middle Ages.
        
             | michaelpb wrote:
             | "The Roman Empire never fell, DEBATE ME"
             | 
             | Though seriously, thanks for writing this up. This is a
             | great explanation of how periodization says more about the
             | "periodizer" than it represents some sort of objective
             | truth about history, magically divorced from the political
             | reality of successive historical writers. Debunking bad
             | history is important... in this field (CS) I've definitely
             | met my share of so-called "STEMacists" whose mental model
             | of history sometimes seems to be derived from Deus Vult
             | memes... -\\_(tsu)_/-
        
           | jrumbut wrote:
           | I can recommend Norman Cantor's _Civilization of the Middle
           | Ages_ for a really great review of the different views of
           | what happened during and after the deterioration of the
           | Western Roman Empire. They range from  "a time of violence
           | and backwardness" to "a lot of people may not have noticed."
           | It's really a great book overall and easier to read than you
           | might expect.
           | 
           | He also wrote _Inventing the Middle Ages_ which sounds like
           | it might be more focused on your question but I haven 't read
           | it so I don't know.
        
             | Balero wrote:
             | I found this podcast series really good for the fall of the
             | Roman Empire. Long, but really good!
             | https://soundcloud.com/fallofromepodcast
        
             | billfruit wrote:
             | Is John Huizinga's Autumn of the Middle Ages, a good source
             | as well?
        
               | jrumbut wrote:
               | I haven't read it and am no expert, but from the summary
               | it seems like Huizinga believes that the increasingly
               | elaborate customs of the aristocracy in the late Middle
               | Ages was a coping mechanism to deal with the intense
               | violence of the period.
               | 
               | Cantor says almost the opposite, that they developed
               | these customs as a marker of their high status and a way
               | to exclude others after they had outlived their original
               | role as the fighting class once cavalry charges were no
               | longer a dominant tactic. This is one of the rare moments
               | in _Civilization_ where the specifics of weapons and
               | warfare are discussed, anyone looking for information on
               | crossbows and lances will be dissappointed.
        
             | neaden wrote:
             | Not to mention a lot of people benefited, like all the
             | slaves or people on the margins paying taxes for little
             | benefit.
        
         | hnmullany wrote:
         | Yes the point of using "Dark Ages" was to point out the
         | dissonance between the detailed instructions on how to manage
         | an estate and the idea that this was a period of total chaos &
         | disorder
        
         | Klwohu wrote:
         | Historians use the term frequently.
        
           | AlotOfReading wrote:
           | This doesn't match my experience at all, so can you expand on
           | it? All of my medievalist friends all hate the term and both
           | of the Wickham books in my possession have disclaimers about
           | it in the intro.
        
         | whearyou wrote:
         | As far as I understand this would have been post-dark ages if
         | it's during or after Charlemange
        
       | why_Mr_Anderson wrote:
       | _and in addition let him be punished by whipping according to the
       | law, except in the case of murder or arson, for which a fine may
       | be exacted._
       | 
       | Punishment for killing someone was only a fine? Dark Ages indeed.
        
         | Muromec wrote:
         | Sending people to prison to do nothing is kinda self-defeating
         | if it's _your_ people. And in this context fine is arguably
         | worse than being whipped.
        
           | neaden wrote:
           | Prison in this time period wasn't really a punishment thing,
           | it's what you did when you were trying to ransom someone you
           | captured in battle mostly. Punishments would have mostly been
           | fines, with some corporal punishment and of course capital
           | punishment.
        
             | why_Mr_Anderson wrote:
             | That applied to aristocracy only, didn't it? Peasants were
             | considered as slightly more intelligent livestock, their
             | lives nearly worthless.
        
               | neaden wrote:
               | No, peasants had rights which varied immensely depending
               | on their exact status and where they were. Still the
               | aristocracy couldn't just kill them or take their stuff,
               | and one of the primary responsibilities of the
               | aristocracy or other landholders was adjudicating
               | disputes between peasants. So if we were two free
               | peasants who got in a fight, we might end up in court
               | with the lord or their representative deciding between
               | us, with one or both of us possibly facing fines.
        
         | dmckeon wrote:
         | Serfs ("our" people) were beaten, free folk were fined. In the
         | US, think W2 employees versus 1099 workers. :-)
        
         | wtdo wrote:
         | I'm not sure, but it may be referencing the old Germanic
         | weregild.
         | 
         | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weregild
        
           | why_Mr_Anderson wrote:
           | Interesting, I've never heard about that. Thank you for the
           | link.
        
       | pugworthy wrote:
       | > 9. It is our wish that each steward shall keep in his district
       | measures for modii and sextaria, and vessels containing eight
       | sextaria, and also baskets of the same capacity as we have in our
       | palace.
       | 
       | For those curious as to the meaning of this one, _sextaria_ is a
       | unit of liquid measure (a pint) and _modii_ is a unit of dry
       | measure (approximately a peck).
       | 
       | So basically they are aiming to have a standard set of measures,
       | which would be important for commerce or tithes of materials such
       | as crops.
        
       | SeanFerree wrote:
       | Love this! Great article!
        
       | adaml_623 wrote:
       | I'm amused that these web pages are from 2008 which feels like
       | the middle ages of the internet.
        
       | BlameKaneda wrote:
       | "25. They are to report on the first of September whether or not
       | there will be food for the pigs."
       | 
       | If there was no food, would the pigs have been slaughtered? Or
       | maybe the underperforming staff would have been brought in
       | instead.
        
         | dmckeon wrote:
         | Pigs would have been expected to forage in the forests, for
         | "mast" - acorns from oaks and other trees - and anything else a
         | pig might eat. Oak trees tend to produce a small amount of
         | acorns in most years, and much more in a "mast year"
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mast_(botany) .
         | 
         | Before refrigeration, meat animals might be kept alive as long
         | as there was stored fodder to feed them, or slaughtered when
         | the weather turned colder, or slaughtered when time and other
         | tasks allowed for preserving meat by salting or sausage-making.
         | 
         | So, think of this as an end-of-harvest status report on when
         | the crown court can expect to start getting sides of bacon
         | delivered, and how many of them.
        
       | cabaalis wrote:
       | > 1. It is our wish that those of our estates which we have
       | established to minister to our needs shall serve our purposes
       | entirely and not those of other men.
       | 
       | It seems like anti-moonlighting clauses are as old as time.
        
       | alekratz wrote:
       | So I'm seeing that this is from the 8th century, but they make
       | reference to corn and pumpkins, which were imports from North
       | America. What's up with that?
        
         | Mediterraneo10 wrote:
         | "Corn" in UK English has historically meant cultivable grains
         | in general, not "maize" specifically as in North America.
         | 
         | Also, "pumpkin" is a standard English translation for the Latin
         | and Greek terms that, if you want to be pedantic, were just
         | "gourd". See e.g. _The Pumpkinification of Claudius_ [0]
         | 
         | [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apocolocyntosis
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | pja wrote:
         | It's a mistranslation of melon I think.
        
         | dan-robertson wrote:
         | I think it's a mistranslation. OF. popon -> pompon -> pompion,
         | meaning a large melon or (later) pumpkin. I guess it was
         | translated as pumpkin rather than melon.
        
         | gh-throw wrote:
         | Corn just means grain. The shift to being equivalent to "maize"
         | is later, and I think not universal in English-speaking
         | dialects (and obviously only happened after the Columbian
         | exchange).
        
       | hnmullany wrote:
       | This is a translation of the Capitulare de Villis - rules for
       | managing Charlemagne's estates - written at the end of the 8th
       | century.
        
       | ALittleLight wrote:
       | I wonder to what extent this is like a statement of corporate
       | leadership principles or actual instructions and tasks that would
       | need to get done. As in, if I were a steward would I skim this,
       | roll my eyes, tuck it away somewhere and get back to work, or
       | would I run out and start counting geese to make sure I was in
       | compliance?
        
         | ajcp wrote:
         | I would imagine it would all depend on the same factors you
         | would evaluate as a corporation:
         | 
         | - How likely am I to get audited?
         | 
         | - If I do get audited how much does the language in this
         | document allow me to pin it on someone in my org, but not me?
         | 
         | - How powerful am I?
         | 
         | - How rich am I?
         | 
         | - How much does the regime like me?
         | 
         | - How much does the regime need me?
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-03-30 23:02 UTC)