[HN Gopher] Common Jobs in a Medieval City
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Common Jobs in a Medieval City
        
       Author : devilcius
       Score  : 231 points
       Date   : 2021-12-04 07:43 UTC (2 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.medievalists.net)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.medievalists.net)
        
       | poulsbohemian wrote:
       | My first reaction at seeing the headline was - I wonder if I
       | could guess these jobs by people's family names, IE: Blacksmith,
       | Cooper, Chandler, Brewer, Baker, etc.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | mastazi wrote:
       | 6th to 10th place are interesting:
       | 
       | 6 - Tailors
       | 
       | 7 - Notaries
       | 
       | 8 - Barbers
       | 
       | 9 - Retailers
       | 
       | 10 - Stonemasons
       | 
       | More notaries than barbers, retailers and stonemasons!
        
         | kashyapc wrote:
         | On notaries (and related officials) in the middle ages, see
         | this[1] painting by Pieter Bruegel from around 1615. Here
         | Bruegel mocks the tax collectors that are bamboozling the
         | farmers with paperwork. "The work was boldly socio-critical in
         | its time."[2]
         | 
         | [1] https://kunstberatung-zurich.com/wp-
         | content/uploads/2018/12/...
         | 
         | [2] https://kunstberatung-zurich.com/pieter-breughel-payment-
         | of-...
        
         | ralfd wrote:
         | I guess people from villages/provinces would maybe travel quite
         | far to the city to notarize something? But barbers would only
         | cut the hair of the city population.
         | 
         | What surprised me was the many shoemakers.
        
         | xyzzy21 wrote:
         | Notaries ~ Lawyers today.
         | 
         | Barbers ~ Doctors today.
        
         | usrusr wrote:
         | I suspect that the ranking is somewhat distorted by the data
         | source: every person working in the general field of notary
         | would be represented in those lists of taxed household heads,
         | whereas in e.g. the field of stonemasonry this would only be
         | true only for a few masters I think, but not for their
         | apprentices or various other forms of low-level support. And I
         | suspect that the wandering stonemasons traveling from project
         | to project wouldn't appear there either. In short: I suspect
         | that interpreting the source like that might be a tiny little
         | bit like trying to derive the percentage of Americans working
         | as plumbers by looking at what is listed at the NYSE.
        
         | drcode wrote:
         | Likely not too surprising, given that most people were
         | illiterate. Probably they also helped with letter
         | writing/reading?
        
           | bluGill wrote:
           | I've seen arguments that most people were literate. Learning
           | to read and write is not hard, and it is a useful skill.
           | 
           | Of course literate was relative: before the printing press
           | there wasn't much to read (book took months to copy by hand).
           | You were reading and writing short notes. Spelling wasn't
           | standardized so you phonetically spelled things and had to
           | figure out what the other person meant. Good enough for
           | letters, but nobody was writing books on anything since
           | teaching in person was (or seemed to be) more efficient.
           | 
           | I'm not a historian, but the above seems like a good
           | argument. Does anyone have a real reference as to the truth?
        
             | catlikesshrimp wrote:
             | Learning to write is difficult. You need paper and pen, and
             | free time, and some reference, and probably a teacher
        
             | LegitShady wrote:
             | It kind of seems like your job as someone making the claim
             | to come up with a reference?
        
         | errcorrectcode wrote:
         | Barber-surgeons.
        
           | nradov wrote:
           | Many barbers also did some dentistry.
        
             | errcorrectcode wrote:
             | I always want a shave and a blood letting after getting
             | some rotten teeth pulled. It was a very convenient trade.
        
               | hammock wrote:
               | I'm guessing the medieval toothpulling would count as a
               | good bloodletting as well.
        
               | errcorrectcode wrote:
               | It depended if you were a bleeder or not. My barber gave
               | me some salted fish to pack in there, so it really didn't
               | bleed all that much.
        
           | Aerroon wrote:
           | For those who don't know: barbers were also surgeons and
           | dentists until around the middle of the 18th century. Not
           | only did they cut your hair they also pulled out your teeth
           | and performed surgery on you.
        
             | hef19898 wrote:
             | And where generally closer to our modern day MDs then real
             | mediaval MDs. As those where theologists coming from
             | christian universities where they received basically zero
             | true medical training.
        
               | pessimizer wrote:
               | Secular doctors were also terrible: before the late-19th
               | century, seeing a doctor was more likely to shorten your
               | lifespan than lengthen it. Unless you needed surgery,
               | which meant that you were in serious trouble anyway, so
               | even with the extreme likelihood of infection your odds
               | were a bit better than just leaving it alone.
               | 
               | As far as I can tell, before like 1880 they prescribed
               | mercury for everything.
               | 
               | Even though they were universally terrible, when you read
               | their writings they're no less confident in what they
               | were doing than modern doctors are.
               | 
               | My favorite historical doctor was Benjamin Rush, a
               | "founding father," who was hilariously bad at his job
               | even for the time.
        
               | elliekelly wrote:
               | The BBC did a short series called "Victorian Pharmacy"
               | where they attempted to use Victorian-era cures on modern
               | people. Except they couldn't even try most of them
               | because they were too dangerous - opium, arsenic,
               | mercury, cocaine, etc. And the things they _could_ try
               | (excepting Lea  & Perrins sauce) were basically torture
               | devices like the Malvern Water Cure[2].
               | 
               | [1]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jXnVTMzSy3s
               | 
               | [2]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malvern_water
        
               | hef19898 wrote:
               | Medival doctors seemd to be fairly good, for their time,
               | when it came to broken bones and such. Basically
               | battlefield injuries that didn't damage inner organs. I
               | remeber when they discovered the bones of an English
               | archer. That guy in hos forties had all kinds of broken
               | bones, healed cuts to his bones and head... That and the
               | Egyptian medics, and before, that drilled holes in heads
               | to relieve pressure. Why know those surgeries where
               | successfup because the bone healed on the skeletons we
               | found. Also back the day people seemed to be not too bad
               | when it came to healing properties of herbs.
               | 
               | But you are right, generally speaking you had the choice
               | between really bad, utterly had, extremely bad and
               | outright killing theit patients bad doctors for the most
               | part of history.
        
               | otabdeveloper4 wrote:
               | > before the late-19th century, seeing a doctor was more
               | likely to shorten your lifespan than lengthen it
               | 
               | Medical malpractice is the third-leading cause of death.
               | (After cancers and cardiovascular problems, aka "old
               | age".)
               | 
               | This is inevitable as we can't really experiment on
               | people and do real science.
        
               | trgn wrote:
               | Yep. Apothecaries were the main source of routine medical
               | care for the masses. To the extent that "an apothecaries
               | wages" was an idiom to refer to their high incomes,
               | somewhat pejoratively.
               | 
               | This is still the case in many communities worldwide, a
               | good pharmacist is a real anchor for providing care for
               | day-to-day health care. It's a great filtering mechanism
               | too, the pharmacist as a buffer for frivolous doctor's
               | visits.
               | 
               | Contrast that to here in the US. When's the last time
               | somebody sought out direct medical care from a
               | pharmacist? Pretty much the kneejerk always is go
               | straight to a doctor, no matter how small the discomfort.
        
       | kemiller wrote:
       | Interesting that there are no smiths or millers on that list,
       | given how common those surnames are.
        
       | dejj wrote:
       | Bypass broken ad-blocker detection:
       | https://web.archive.org/web/20211128175917/https://www.medie...
        
       | everyone wrote:
       | I wonder what the most common jobs are in a modern city. Probably
       | all bullshit.
        
         | Cthulhu_ wrote:
         | Dunno about major cities, but there's national statistics for
         | these things: https://www.bls.gov/emp/tables/employment-by-
         | major-industry-...
        
           | gullywhumper wrote:
           | BLS has the OEWS (occupational employment and wage
           | statistics) at the national, state, and metropolitan/CBSA
           | levels.
           | 
           | https://www.bls.gov/oes/home.htm
        
         | agumonkey wrote:
         | It all boils down to what a good job means for a human. I may
         | be special but I find a few axis that I need:
         | 
         | - skillful
         | 
         | - useful
         | 
         | - well organized enough
         | 
         | Today people don't do much, they don't master much, most of it
         | is done far away in large shops or plants. It's rarely that
         | useful (we're overwhelmingly comfy) and recent management
         | practices are surreal most of the time.
         | 
         | I talked to a few people that prefered low wage in exchange for
         | more skills or usefulness, even if the job might look less
         | impressive in the first place.
        
         | dmurray wrote:
         | Probably not. Of course, it's highly dependent on how you group
         | related professions, but according to [0], which has a
         | granularity similar to our medieval source, the three most
         | common occupations in New York in 2020 were retail salespeople,
         | nurses and labourers. You need to get to 4 and 5 before the
         | office and management jobs usually associated with the
         | "bullshit jobs" epithet start to appear.
         | 
         | [0] https://stacker.com/new-york/new-york-city/most-common-
         | jobs-...
        
         | technothrasher wrote:
         | Healthcare and retail/restaurant work I would imagine.
        
         | izzymiller wrote:
         | I grabbed some public data and took a quick look in comparison:
         | https://app.hex.tech/hex-public/app/fffe29ce-a5b2-42b7-92d5-...
        
         | bruce343434 wrote:
         | bullshit in whose opinion? As someone who does not believe in
         | god, are all of the church related jobs bullshit? Or are they
         | not, since a lot of people want churches and their services? If
         | a job exists, there's apparently at least one person who wants
         | it done.
        
           | smitty1e wrote:
           | Church worker; social worker: what's the difference?
        
             | watwut wrote:
             | That they are two massively different occupations, with
             | different goals, different processes and different
             | regulations they fall under. Just about the only thing they
             | have the same is low salary.
        
               | PeterisP wrote:
               | The point is that there's more overlap than how it looks
               | like on the surface level. E.g. part of what a A.D. 1500
               | village pastor does is what's done nowadays by
               | psychotherapists and marriage counselors; the role in
               | filling the people's needs is similar even if the
               | processes and regulations are wildly different, just as
               | the processes and regulations of A.D. 1500 shoemaker or
               | surgeon are wildly different than the modern shoe factory
               | worker or surgeon.
        
           | agumonkey wrote:
           | That's ignoring a lot of structure induced jobs. Often nobody
           | wants it done but you can't fire a person so you invent a
           | role. Or sometimes the need is mostly a factor of higher rank
           | carelessness or incompetence.. fix the tooling and there's no
           | need to hire 5 more guys to grind through endless papers or
           | mails.
        
           | thedailymail wrote:
           | I think the parent quote may be in reference to David
           | Graeber's commentary on "bullshit jobs".
        
             | bruce343434 wrote:
             | I figured as much. But I don't agree with the premise of
             | the book. Sure, we all "know" the jobs are bullshit, and
             | yet they aren't. Let's go over the wikipedia summary at
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullshit_Jobs
             | 
             | >flunkies, who serve to make their superiors feel
             | important, e.g., receptionists, administrative assistants,
             | door attendants, makers of websites whose sites neglect
             | ease of use and speed for looks;
             | 
             | They _serve_ , hence, not a bullshit job. We might look
             | down on it, but they are providing value to their employer.
             | Sadly perhaps, humans are just deeply subjective. See again
             | my religion example. Also, this seems really dismissive of
             | receptionists/PAs. These people do a _lot_ of _real_ work.
             | 
             | >goons, who act to harm or deceive others on behalf of
             | their employer, e.g., lobbyists, corporate lawyers,
             | telemarketers, public relations specialists, community
             | managers;
             | 
             | Not very nice no, but again they provide value to their
             | bosses. Probably to themselves too.
             | 
             | >duct tapers, who temporarily fix problems that could be
             | fixed permanently, e.g., programmers repairing bloated
             | code, airline desk staff who calm passengers whose bags do
             | not arrive;
             | 
             | This just seems to be naive idealism.
             | 
             | >box tickers, who create the appearance that something
             | useful is being done when it is not, e.g., survey
             | administrators, in-house magazine journalists, corporate
             | compliance officers, quality service managers;
             | 
             | Here it gets interesting. These people may actually be the
             | first that don't provide value, but trick others into
             | thinking they do.
             | 
             | >taskmasters, who manage--or create extra work for--those
             | who do not need it, e.g., middle management, leadership
             | professionals.
             | 
             | This is a mix of dumb (mis)managers, and malicious time
             | wasters. I think it's obvious that a lot of resources of
             | all kinds are wasted by inefficiencies caused by stupidity.
             | That's a human (as in, we as a species) problem. Then
             | there's malice, which fits into the "tricks others into
             | believing they provide value" category.
             | 
             | Anyway, that's just my take on it.
        
               | avgcorrection wrote:
               | I guess a job can't be bullshit to you as long as one
               | isn't committing outright fraud.
        
               | CaptArmchair wrote:
               | > providing value
               | 
               | That's the crux, isn't it? What kind of "value" are we
               | talking about? The argument doesn't hold unless we start
               | defining this in concrete terms. That's where you'll find
               | that there are many different ways to attribute value.
               | Inevitably, value attributing is inherently human and
               | therefor subjective. "value", such as it is, is a social
               | construct.
               | 
               | Sure, many of the "bullshit jobs" "provide value to
               | employers", but that doesn't invalidate the argument to
               | grant them the moniker "bullshit job".
               | 
               | So, what makes a job a "bullshit job"? Well, the defining
               | criteria would be that they only exist to the benefit of
               | their employer. They don't generate any value as far as
               | the stakeholders of an employer is concerned: clients,
               | customers, members, patrons, patients, visitors, other
               | employees, etc.
               | 
               | Dedicating staff to calm passengers whose bags do not
               | arrive is a clear cost/benefit trade-off as far as the
               | airline is concerned. Clearly, it's cheaper / easier to
               | have staff comfort passengers, then fix the issue in a
               | structural fashion. The example of a "bullshit job" is
               | apt, because the customers of the airline can clearly
               | push through the illusion that the airline would actually
               | care about their luggage.
               | 
               | Context matters as far as public perception is concerned,
               | though. Things are not always that clear cut.
               | 
               | For instance, corporations aren't necessarily "evil" or
               | "good" in binary terms. Their impact on the world tends
               | to be judged in a morally ambivalent fashion. A corporate
               | lawyer may defend not just their employer, but also
               | squarely aligns their convictions / principles with the
               | ambiguous impact their employer may or may not have on
               | the world, for better or worse. Arguably, the tobacco
               | industry has enabled the social mobility of millions of
               | people, and at the same time, their product has caused
               | the death of millions as well. Depending on what moral
               | stance you'd take, it's valid to perceive a corporate
               | lawyer both as a "goon" defending a reprehensible view on
               | the world, as well as a honest employee defending the
               | livelihoods of many. (note: I'm not taking sides here,
               | it's just an example!)
               | 
               | In a complex and ambiguous world, "bullshit jobs" are
               | labelled as such because they are perceived as such
               | through the lens of current morals, values, socio-
               | economic, political, cultural zeitgeist. A corporate
               | lawyer is seen as a "bullshit job" because society
               | accepts the ambivalence in what they do, and why their
               | role is a thing, even though it's role most people feel
               | the world wouldn't have to need in the first place.
        
               | watwut wrote:
               | > flunkies, who serve to make their superiors feel
               | important, e.g., receptionists, administrative
               | assistants, door attendants, makers of websites whose
               | sites neglect ease of use and speed for looks;
               | 
               | Imo, receptionists, administrative assistant and "makers
               | of websites whose sites neglect ease of use and speed for
               | looks" are all actually useful. Their function is not
               | just to make someone feel superior. Instead, I would
               | argue that whoever wrote that was caught in own feeling
               | of superiority over service staff.
        
               | bruce343434 wrote:
               | Exactly. I can't imagine running a doctors office without
               | a reception. Or really any public facing company/office
               | without a reception. Would anyone like to have the
               | dentist use his time to answer the phone rather than fix
               | teeth? Seems like that would under utilize the dentist's
               | degree.
        
               | kwhitefoot wrote:
               | Reception at my doctor's in Norway are all qualified
               | nurses. My sister on the other hand goes to a surgery in
               | the UK has a dedicated receptionist. My sister's
               | experience of visiting the surgery is considerably worse
               | than mine. At the dental practice that I use the
               | hygienists take turns to run the reception desk.
               | 
               | > Would anyone like to have the dentist use his time to
               | answer the phone rather than fix teeth?
               | 
               | I don't care who answers the telephone as long as they
               | are competent to answer questions and have authority to
               | solve problems.
        
               | brianwawok wrote:
               | Wouldn't that raise prices, to use a nurse as a
               | reception?
               | 
               | In the US it would be something like:
               | 
               | Receptionist: 30k / year
               | 
               | Nurse: 80k / year.
               | 
               | So you have:
               | 
               | Doctor's office 1: 3x Nurse, 240k per year in salary
               | 
               | Doctor's office 2: 2x Nurse, 1x Receptionist, 190k pear
               | year.
               | 
               | That 50k in extra cost has to come from somewhere. Lower
               | paid doctors, higher costs, ???
        
               | alphager wrote:
               | In Germany, the "nurse" (it's a separate profession from
               | nursing) performs a variety of medical tasks (like
               | vaccinations, blood tests, allergy tests) and does
               | prioritization of incoming patients based on initial
               | assessments. I've also had the "nurse" complete initial
               | medical history with me.
               | 
               | This model is strongly influenced by the size of the
               | clinic: we usually have small clinics owned and run by
               | the only doctor in the clinic (though they sometimes team
               | up). As the amount of patients per day is hard-limited by
               | the doctors time, such small clinics have no need for a
               | full-time receptionists.
        
               | JackFr wrote:
               | I don't know how things have changed over the past 25
               | years, but I used to work as a defense contractor and
               | would frequently have to visit the Navy Annex in Virginia
               | which was also HQ US Marine Corps.
               | 
               | It always struck me as weird that the guardhouse gate to
               | enter was manned by a $12 hour off-brand security guard.
               | I mentioned it to someone at one point, and I was told
               | "Do you know how much it costs to train a Marine? It
               | would be an outrageous waste of resources to staff that
               | guardhouse with a Marine."
               | 
               | Go figure.
        
               | handrous wrote:
               | A relative who put in over 20 years in the army told me
               | that a lot of their post gate guards were contractors
               | these days. Considering that when he told me this it was
               | the height of the occupation of Iraq ('05, maybe?), and
               | that lots of the soldiers on these posts would soon be
               | _guarding gates and checkpoints in Iraq_ , it struck me
               | as super fucking weird that they didn't use that as a
               | training opportunity to get them experience doing that
               | stateside--very different, sure, but any experience beats
               | none, surely, and training's a ton of what they do when
               | not deployed _anyway_ , so seems like a win-win, but I
               | guess either that's not true _or_ whoever landed those
               | contracts had some really good lobbyists.
        
               | w_TF wrote:
               | knowing their spending habits, i tend to assume the DOD
               | is paying that off-brand gate guard 10x whatever it costs
               | to train a marine
        
               | WFHRenaissance wrote:
               | > box tickers, who create the appearance that something
               | useful is being done when it is not, e.g., survey
               | administrators, in-house magazine journalists, corporate
               | compliance officers, quality service managers;
               | 
               | IDK, I think these sort of workers provide value too.
               | Some industries need QA (quality service manager), or
               | else we'd see a lot more shoddy production across the
               | board. Compliance officers provide a defense against
               | fees/fines incurred by violations of law/policy. Survey
               | administrators ensure the quality of survey collection
               | via planning/organizing/QAing. In-house magazine
               | journalists... well it depends on the company, but some
               | company blogs are actually entertaining/useful. I always
               | kind of hated the Graeber book because it's ultimately
               | just a value judgement that people could be doing
               | something better with their time... which is probably
               | true... in a perfect world? But until then, the
               | occasional corp blog post keeps me from bashing my head
               | in on Monday morning :)
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | s5300 wrote:
         | Something related to Wal-Mart.
         | 
         | Seriously.
        
           | baud147258 wrote:
           | or maybe Amazon now
        
         | errcorrectcode wrote:
         | "Executive communication facilitator" ranks up there in terms
         | of BS, but not that common.
         | 
         | Most common would be truck driver, for-hire driver,
         | salesperson, lawyer, or janitor.
        
         | thorin wrote:
         | I guess a recent pandemic would have shown which jobs were
         | important these days:
         | 
         | Farmers Truck Drivers Shop Staff Medical Specialists Teachers
         | Infrastructure specialists (power,fuel,extending into IT work)
         | --- Purveyors of leisure activities, bars/brewing,
         | restaurants/takeaways, online gaming, gambling --- Venture
         | capitalists and financial experts Consultants specializing in
         | skimming and offshoring Sales, marketing and influencers
         | 
         | I'll let you assign the weightings
        
       | claudiulodro wrote:
       | A fun one that I'm personally familiar with is the Upholder,
       | predecessor to the modern Upholsterer. Back in medieval times,
       | the upholder was a combination furniture and textile producer as
       | well as interior designer and the person who did the banners in
       | castles, bedsheets, etc. Basically anything involving textiles.
       | Over time, padded furniture became the main focus of the trade,
       | leading to what we think of as upholsterers.[1]
       | 
       | [1] https://spruceaustin.com/uncategorized/history-of-the-
       | uphold...
        
       | stevenjgarner wrote:
       | It surprises me that all 10 jobs still exist, while there are
       | several more recent occupations that no longer exist (albeit they
       | were not that common):
       | 
       | Milkmen, Elevator operator, Switchboard Operator, Ice Cutter,
       | Bowling Pin Setter, Film projectionist, Lamplighter, Leech
       | collector, Alchemist, Bematist, Redsmith, Daguerreotypist, Town
       | crier
        
         | WalterBright wrote:
         | > Leech collector
         | 
         | That profession seems to still be around, we just call them
         | politicians :-)
        
         | pram wrote:
         | Fresh milk delivery seems like something that could definitely
         | make a comeback though!
        
         | bagacrap wrote:
         | most of those didn't exist in medieval times either. Is it
         | surprising that most common are also most timeless?
        
         | kibwen wrote:
         | See also The Lindy Effect:
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lindy_effect
        
           | anthony_r wrote:
           | <chuckles nervously as a software developer>
        
             | bserge wrote:
             | The industry is over half a century old by now, barring
             | some absolute catastrophe, it's not going anywhere.
        
           | adamc wrote:
           | Thanks for the link! Hadn't heard of that, although I've seen
           | similar reasoning in other contexts. (Basically, the most
           | reasonable estimate, absent other data, is that you are at
           | the mean -- so, for example, one could reasonably guess that
           | half the people to ever be born have been born at present.)
        
             | stevesimmons wrote:
             | So some people have 4 testicles?
             | 
             | (assuming I'm average...)
        
               | tomjakubowski wrote:
               | I'm probably missing the point here but yes, in fact.
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyorchidism
               | 
               | A Rare Case of Polyorchidism: Four Testes:
               | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4747319/
        
         | dionidium wrote:
         | The milkman is alive and well here in Rhode Island. Every other
         | house has one of these on their front porch:
         | https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-55YYt59jQqk/TxnrEKJT4BI/AAAAAAAAA...
        
         | gumby wrote:
         | Milkmen, elevator operator, and switchboard operator were
         | _extremely_ common occupations in their heydays, all of which
         | overlapped with my childhood.
         | 
         | I only stopped milkman service here in Palo Alto a couple of
         | years ago (though the dairy downtown shut down maybe 30 years
         | ago). It turned out to be a direct milkman->teenager pipeline
         | which was better than walking to the grocery store twice a day.
        
           | irrational wrote:
           | Why are you going twice a day? We drink 3 gallons of milk a
           | week, but only go once a week.
        
             | gumby wrote:
             | I didn't really go twice a day, what I meant was that a
             | teenager can drink a gallon of milk, eat five square meals,
             | every day and still be thin as a rail.
             | 
             | Given all the other food being bought we didn't really have
             | to have milk delivered, but milk the doorstep seemed to
             | result in less junk food consumption.
             | 
             | As an empty nester I drink less than half a gallon a week.
        
         | tomjen3 wrote:
         | Alchemist became Chemist. Dageuerreotypist became photographer,
         | which has only recently gone away.
         | 
         | Town crier is now the guy flipping a sign for the new burger
         | joint.
        
           | Andrew_nenakhov wrote:
           | Town crier [1] is now news anchor.
           | 
           | [1]: https://i.pinimg.com/736x/79/2b/89/792b8997970b433b06b10
           | 721b...
        
             | beebeepka wrote:
             | Been a while. Is that from Rome or Spartacus?
        
           | ativzzz wrote:
           | Photographers have absolutely not gone away, at least not in
           | the wedding industry.
        
         | zuminator wrote:
         | A building I worked in recently finally got rid of its elevator
         | operators (along with a set of frighteningly rickety elevators)
         | about 4 years ago. They must still exist in some places, maybe
         | a few grand old hotels and social clubs.
        
         | ericd wrote:
         | We had a milkman from a local farm until recently. Highly
         | recommend it. Or if you're in the Bay Area, Farmstead delivers
         | glass bottle straus milk and picks up the empties.
        
         | pavel_lishin wrote:
         | I would argue that a daguerrotypist is exactly analogous to a
         | modern photographer; and print media is still developed as
         | well.
        
         | selfhoster11 wrote:
         | Milkmen definitely still exist in the UK, and likely other
         | places.
        
           | stevesimmons wrote:
           | https://www.milkandmore.co.uk/
           | 
           | These guys do doorstop milk deliveries to much of the UK. In
           | our area they comes on Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday
           | mornings at around 5:30am.
           | 
           | Milk in old fashioned glass bottles, Welsh cakes, yoghurt...
           | Yummy!
        
         | seanhunter wrote:
         | Milkmen 100% exist in the UK. Even though I don't drink actual
         | milk they have a massive range of products they will deliver,
         | so I get fruit juice, various foods and oat milk delivered by
         | my milkman.
        
           | phonebanshee wrote:
           | Milkmen 100% exist in the US also. Several houses close by
           | have delivery coolers for https://www.smithbrothersfarms.com/
           | and their trucks appear regularly.
        
       | MikeTaylor wrote:
       | Striking that there were more shoemakers than tailors.
        
         | ldoughty wrote:
         | This statistic might also be a specialization for just this
         | case/city. The author noted that Montpelier was known for
         | shoes, which might mean people traveled there for shoes, or
         | they were exported/bought by traveling merchants and sold
         | elsewhere.
        
           | analog31 wrote:
           | They may have been exported to the surrounding countryside
           | too. The one thing that a farmer couldn't make for
           | themselves.
        
         | PeterisP wrote:
         | As the article mentions, a lot of the "most popular jobs" is
         | determined not by the popularity of the industries but by the
         | fragmentation of jobs. If you have 20 people working on shoes
         | and 40 people working on clothing, then if shoemakers are a
         | single profession/guild but clothing has 10 people each working
         | on a different stage of the product (which actually is the
         | case, with the most labor-intensive tasks of medieval clothing
         | production being in making the actual cloth, not tailoring it)
         | then shoemakers become a more common job.
        
         | dmurray wrote:
         | 4% of the workforce being shoemakers seems enormous. One person
         | working full time making shoes for every fifty-ish adults?
         | 
         | I don't know what the right comparison is today. According to
         | [0], the fashion industry accounts for about 3% of world GDP.
         | Perhaps shoes are a quarter of that?
         | 
         | [0] https://fashinnovation.nyc/fashion-industry-statistics/
        
           | honkdaddy wrote:
           | It does seem a bit strange, you're right. When you read into
           | it though, this city seemed to have a higher cobbler
           | population than most, as alluded to by the author.
           | 
           | > They were organized in different guilds, based on the
           | street in which they kept their shops. In 1360, nine
           | cobblers' guilds were attested in documents, all situated
           | within the city's walls
           | 
           | I know almost nothing about medieval France, but perhaps
           | peasants from smaller surrounding cities may have come to
           | this one to learn or work, leading to this skew?
        
             | wildzzz wrote:
             | There's always an overlap of skills. Cobblers may have been
             | tailoring on the side but wouldn't be counted as such. I've
             | been to many dry cleaners that will do alterations or
             | repairs on clothes but also will do some light shoe repair
             | as well. They won't make you a shoe but can fix a broken
             | heel just like I'm sure there are cobblers out there who
             | are capable of clothing repairs.
        
               | ghaff wrote:
               | Cobblers are very good for doing repairs of anything that
               | requires heavier duty needles and threads.
        
               | dotancohen wrote:
               | So, full-text search making full use of every core under
               | the heatsink? ))
        
           | nradov wrote:
           | They were serving a lot of customers from outside the city
           | who would occasionally visit to trade and shop.
        
           | kingcharles wrote:
           | When I was a kid there were vastly more shoe repair places
           | than there are now. I guess if we plotted the graph backwards
           | there would be way more several hundreds years ago.
        
           | qw wrote:
           | The shoemakers also repaired and maintained shoes. They would
           | replace soles, repair holes etc.
        
             | dmurray wrote:
             | That's an argument for needing fewer people, not more -
             | since it happens in situations where it's less labour-
             | intensive to repair shoes than to make them from scratch.
        
               | Someone wrote:
               | Not necessarily. If the materials are expensive, paying
               | somebody to repair a shoe can be the cheaper option.
               | 
               | I think people still repaired socks after knitting them
               | was automated for that reason.
               | 
               | The first automated knitting machine was from 1589. Queen
               | Elizabeth I denied its inventor a patent _"because of her
               | concern for the employment security of the kingdom 's
               | many hand knitters whose livelihood might be threatened
               | by such mechanization"_
               | (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Lee_(inventor))
               | 
               | Edit: maybe not. https://www.historylink.org/File/5721
               | learned me that gear for us soldiers in World War One was
               | knitted manually. Maybe, those machines weren't used
               | (much) yet by then?
        
               | TheCoelacanth wrote:
               | Isn't the main reason that making from scratch is less
               | labour-intensive than repairing because of mass
               | production?
               | 
               | With medieval production methods, I would bet that making
               | from scratch is significantly more labour-intensive than
               | repairing.
        
           | mysterydip wrote:
           | I assume 1) people walked a lot more, 2) shoes took longer to
           | make, and 3) didn't last as long which means more people
           | necessary to handle demand. I could be completely off,
           | though.
        
             | telesilla wrote:
             | Exactly, walking! Something few of us do these days even at
             | short distances. I prefer shoes that can recobbled but I
             | know from the dwindling numbers of cobblers that I'm a
             | shrinking demographic.
        
             | sillyquiet wrote:
             | Point 3 is the key one - soles, especially. Rubber soles
             | weren't a thing - they were made of leather (or sometimes
             | textiles) and they wore out in a matter of a couple months
             | or even a few weeks with heavy usage, especially give point
             | 1. Point 2 isn't really the case - your later period and
             | fancier pointed-toe, lace-and-ribbon-bedecked shoes for the
             | higher classes took probably some time, but a pair of
             | common leather turn-shoes can be made in a couple hours.
        
         | Xylakant wrote:
         | It's much easier to make clothes at home than shoes. I could
         | probably cobble together an odd looking shirt given some time
         | and instructions without needing to buy special tools, but
         | leather shoes are an entirely different thing.
        
           | ajross wrote:
           | Exactly. The article nods to this in a few places, but it's
           | important to recognize that this is an accounting of
           | "recognized" professions, something that left some kind of
           | written account (most of the article is based on tax records
           | it seems like). Which means at the end of the day this is
           | mostly a list of what the men were doing.
           | 
           | Stuff done "at home" obviously involves work, but it wasn't a
           | "profession" in a notional sense so it wasn't recorded.
           | Certainly we should assume that there was trade within and
           | between cities based on this kind of output too (i.e. "Is
           | that one of Marie's sweaters?", "Here's a few coins, go to
           | Sophie down the street and see if she has any more of that
           | jam from last summer").
        
           | guythedudebro wrote:
           | I'm amused and perplexed at your choice of the word "cobble"
           | there
        
             | hungryforcodes wrote:
             | Mind you -- my amusement was "odd looking shirt". It made
             | me imagine what that would actually look like.
        
             | Xylakant wrote:
             | I'm not a native speaker so this was entirely
             | unintentional, but now that you point it out I see the pun.
             | Thank you.
        
               | kingcharles wrote:
               | I've never met a non-native speaker who used the word
               | "cobble", and successfully too. Props to you!
        
               | Xylakant wrote:
               | Why I missed that is not the meaning of the phrase "to
               | cobble something together", but its root in "cobbler",
               | which is - at least for me - something I rarely use.
        
               | mrlonglong wrote:
               | Also Cockneys in old London would say cobblers if you
               | were talking out of your hat. Also balls to refer to the
               | pawnbrokers on account of their three ball shop signs.
        
           | Eric_WVGG wrote:
           | On a related note, this article reminded me of something one
           | of my professors had to say about William Shakespeare.
           | 
           | There's a long tradition of conspiracy theorizing around
           | Shakespeare, that he didn't actually write his own plays,
           | that they were instead written by Francis Bacon or Queen
           | Elizabeth or something ridiculous. These arguments usually
           | start from his background: how could the son of a common
           | glovemaker have gotten the sort of education necessary to
           | write like this?
           | 
           | The thing is, glovemaker was a highly skilled profession.
           | Exactly like you said, any dum dum could cut a hole in a
           | sheet of fabric and call it a poncho, but handmade shoes and
           | gloves take serious craftsmanship. This kind of profession
           | would have put Shakespeare's family firmly in the upper-
           | middle class.
        
         | photojosh wrote:
         | In tracing my family tree, I found a branch that went back to a
         | small town in Scotland, and at least 3-4 generations back were
         | shoemakers. When did my forefather leave the family trade?
         | Circa 1850, when the Industrial Revolution apparently hit
         | shoemaking hard.
         | 
         | He ended up keeper of a coffee shop in Glasgow, and his
         | daughter was on a ship to Australia in 1891.
        
           | dotancohen wrote:
           | > on a ship to Australia in 1891
           | 
           | What was she accused of? ))
        
             | monknomo wrote:
             | They quit transporting people in 1868
        
           | kingcharles wrote:
           | I traced mine back to 1600. They were all shepherds.
        
         | zoomablemind wrote:
         | Perhaps the ranking may be also influenced by reporting
         | requirements.
         | 
         | According to the article, the shoemakers were organized in
         | guilds, so possibly this would standardize the reporting to the
         | city gov.
        
         | lqet wrote:
         | I would expect that. Clothes last significantly longer than
         | shoes (you can wear a cheap T-Shirt for way over 5 years, but
         | even good midrange shoes start to fall apart after 2 years). It
         | is also fairly easy to repair or even make clothes at home. But
         | shoes?
        
           | agumonkey wrote:
           | I'd say one would suffer a lot more with borked shoes than
           | torn upper clothing.
        
           | bluedino wrote:
           | Shoes might fall apart in 2 years if you wear them every day.
           | Do you wear the same t-shirt every day?
        
             | Cthulhu_ wrote:
             | Yeah, false equivalence. If you wear a dozen shoes on
             | rotation, they will also last for 5 years.
        
         | vincebowdren wrote:
         | Weaving and making clothing was done mostly within the
         | household, by women. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_medi
         | eval_clothing#:~:t....
        
         | lordnacho wrote:
         | You can keep wearing clothes that are messed up, broken shoes
         | will stop you being able to do a lot of stuff.
        
       | StupidOne wrote:
       | I'm surprised blacksmiths didn't cut to the top 10. Almost
       | everyone would need some kind of metal tool(s) to do their job in
       | medieval time.
        
         | duxup wrote:
         | My grandfather was a doctor in WWII and at one point traveled
         | up through China and other places that had been heavily
         | decimated / damaged / looted.
         | 
         | I remember him talking about how access to a ship (even if over
         | long distance) with a good machine shop was critical to just
         | get locals up and running with basic metal tools for everyday
         | use and medical uses.
         | 
         | It reminded me of the importance of a local blacksmith and
         | such.
        
         | gota wrote:
         | On topic - I suggest the following blog post series:
         | 
         | https://acoup.blog/2020/09/18/collections-iron-how-did-they-...
         | 
         | I learned a lot about the production and manufacturing of metal
         | (iron) items. If I recall correctly, for iron production, a lot
         | of people are involved in obtaining the fuel (wood, ash,
         | charcoal) and not so many blacksmiths are necessary
        
         | bluGill wrote:
         | Blacksmith wasn't a major job until the 1800s when industrial
         | revolution made the job possible. In the 1800s a blacksmith
         | should made nothing: everything was made in a factory and the
         | blacksmith just did the final fitting or repair work. Sure they
         | could and did do some custom decorative stuff, but only the
         | rich could afford that.
         | 
         | Before then a city might have a couple in employee of the noble
         | to make armor or swords, but the common person did without, or
         | handed down tools until they couldn't be used at all. In a
         | village a blacksmith was a side job of a talented farmer, but
         | it couldn't pay the bills as nobody could afford to buy much
         | custom made metal.
        
           | cafard wrote:
           | In Chaucer's _Canterbury Tales_ there is a smith in the
           | Miller 's Tale, who worked on farming equipment: plow
           | harness, shares, and coulters. (Unless my Middle English is
           | more forgotten than I thought.)
        
           | hef19898 wrote:
           | Farming tools? Wood working rools? Tools for builders? All
           | made a blacksmith of sorts. Those making arms and armor where
           | a highly specialized bunch.
           | 
           | That being said, arms manufacturing was a very well developed
           | industry during tue middle ages. Including general
           | contractors, cuttlers, in case of weapons that coordinated
           | the work of the people making the blades, the handles, the
           | scarbords and dis the heat treatment.
           | 
           | If anything, the classic blacksmith went into decline during
           | yhe industrial revolution. With tools, weapons and everyday
           | stuff being mass produced in a factory somewhere.
        
             | zdragnar wrote:
             | Weren't bladesmiths a separate profession? I was under the
             | impression that blacksmiths were your run of the mill iron
             | workers, especially considering that a good blade could
             | take far longer to produce than a blacksmith might be able
             | to devote time to.
             | 
             | Slapping a wedge of metal on a pole and calling it a pike
             | could be done by anyone though, I suppose.
        
           | mattowen_uk wrote:
           | So who shoe-d the horses then, was it the farmers?
        
             | eschneider wrote:
             | That would be a farrier, which is a sort of specialized
             | blacksmith. That said, sure, farmers can (and do!) do that
             | themselves.
        
           | datameta wrote:
           | Sure there were self-learners that expanded their trade to
           | supply others for coin. However blacksmithing was certainly a
           | skilled artisan / tradesperson role from antiquity to
           | medieval times that operated on an apprenticeship scheme. One
           | often had to dedicate themselves to it exclusively.
        
         | josh8042 wrote:
         | Same, also surprised there how highly butcher ranks with baker
         | not even in the to 10. I had the impression that meat was a
         | luxury in Medieval times
        
           | handrous wrote:
           | Maybe paying someone else to make your bread is _even more_
           | luxurious. I wonder if people who ran communal ovens, where
           | you bring your own dough ready-to-bake and then take it out
           | after it cooks, were counted as  "bakers".
        
         | WFHRenaissance wrote:
         | Definitely a blacksmith in almost every city, but probably
         | fewer blacksmiths per city than the other jobs. Metal tools are
         | built to last, and are expensive, so it was probably often a
         | low volume high cost kind of business where production could be
         | covered by a minimal number of smiths.
        
           | WalterBright wrote:
           | I bet most of a blacksmith's business was shoeing horses and
           | making nails, not making tools.
        
           | bserge wrote:
           | If only they knew about planned obsolescence /s
        
           | JackFr wrote:
           | They must have been quite prolific then. There's a reason
           | Smith is the most common surname in the English speaking
           | world.
        
             | claudiulodro wrote:
             | TBF there are many types of smiths, so maybe that's why:
             | blacksmith, goldsmith, tinsmith, coppersmith, etc.
        
               | thaumasiotes wrote:
               | Probably not; the odds are very high that the name
               | "Smith" (or any analogue like "Kuznets") originally
               | refers to a blacksmith. Most metalwork is ironwork.
        
             | cafard wrote:
             | According to Mencken's _The American Language_ any
             | metalworking job qualified one for the surname.
        
             | c54 wrote:
             | Ive heard the possibly apocryphal reason for this is that
             | invading armies would kill or appropriate workers in other
             | professions but keep around the trained blacksmiths working
             | the forge and producing weapons and tools for war. Smiths
             | survived the waves of conquerors.
        
               | automatic6131 wrote:
               | Wouldn't be true for England which has gone the last
               | millenia (almost) without invasion.
        
               | c54 wrote:
               | Duchies etc still changed hands quite frequently
        
               | swiftcoder wrote:
               | There were technically invasion attempts up until the
               | 18th century, but even discarding most of those as
               | insignificant, we can hardly neglect the War of the Roses
               | and Henry Tudor's (successful) invasion in 1485...
        
             | bsza wrote:
             | Maybe it was such an honorable craft that people were more
             | likely to name themselves after it compared to other
             | trades?
        
               | mackinley wrote:
               | I have that surname but not for the reason that a
               | blacksmith was in my family. My great grandparents took
               | the name Smith at Ellis Island to Americanize themselves.
               | I suspect this backstory is probably quite common in the
               | US, especially amongst Irish and Italian immigrants in
               | the late 18 to early 1900's.
        
           | credit_guy wrote:
           | My Dad was born before WW2 in a village in Eastern Europe,
           | which was probably closer to a medieval village than to a
           | 21st century one. He told me that a blacksmith would ask for
           | 3 plum trees to do a certain job, presumably in order to make
           | charcoal. I don't think there was anything special about plum
           | trees, other than the local availability: people were (and
           | still are) growing plum trees in order to make spirits.
           | Giving up 3 plum trees meant giving up the spirits you could
           | get from them for six years until the new trees would grow to
           | maturity. So, yes, you wouldn't go to the blacksmith very
           | often, if you could help it.
        
             | dotancohen wrote:
             | Of extraordinary interest is the fact that the blacksmith
             | made his own charcoal and presumably other consumables and
             | tools. From whence his anvil?
             | 
             | Would you mind sharing some more details, such as where was
             | the village? This is exactly the type of history story that
             | I enjoy telling my children.
             | 
             | If you'd prefer to share privately, my Gmail username is
             | the same as my HN username. Thank you!
        
               | JackFr wrote:
               | > Of extraordinary interest is the fact that the
               | blacksmith made his own charcoal
               | 
               | True. In medieval Europe charcoal burner was typically a
               | very specialized profession.
               | 
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charcoal_burner#Medieval_ch
               | arc...
               | 
               | "During the Middle Ages, charcoal burners were
               | ostracised. Their profession was considered dishonourable
               | and they were frequently accused of evil practices. Even
               | today there is a certain denigration of this former
               | occupation."
        
               | irrational wrote:
               | I always knew there was something off about all these
               | Traeger enthusiasts.
        
               | zikduruqe wrote:
               | Correct. They want to smoke meat using electricity,
               | buttons and timers. Like an oven.
               | 
               | Give me an offset stick burner, that I have to fiddle
               | with constantly. That is the proper art of smoking.
        
               | easytiger wrote:
               | > True. In medieval Europe charcoal burner was typically
               | a very specialized profession.
               | 
               | This thread reminds me of Kingdom Come: Deliverance, a
               | computer RPG which has done in incredible job recreating
               | aspects of life in medieval Bohemia. It has a fantastic
               | level of historical accuracy and things like charcoal
               | trading as a dependency to a forge are integral to one of
               | the DLCs of the game.
        
               | JackFr wrote:
               | While barbecuing last summer one afternoon I fell down
               | the Wikipedia rabbit-hole and for a few days afterwards I
               | was an expert on the chemistry, physics, history and
               | economics of charcoal.
               | 
               | Sadly now all I've retained are a few dirty smudges.
        
               | apcragg wrote:
               | Both of those lines have no citation so while I wouldn't
               | doubt it, that page seems unreliable.
        
               | thaumasiotes wrote:
               | > From whence his anvil?
               | 
               | As to that specifically, I'd guess (based on not much)
               | that he inherited it.
        
               | credit_guy wrote:
               | I'm not sure if the blacksmith was making his own
               | charcoal, or exchanging the wood for charcoal from
               | someone who specialized in that. My Dad's village was
               | about 250 km from this village [1] where people make
               | charcoal even these days (one of the last remaining
               | charcoal burning sites in the world). It's possible back
               | in the day there were much more numerous such sites, so
               | one would not have to travel far.
               | 
               | But even if they had, trade over large distances was
               | surprisingly common. When I was a kid and spending summer
               | vacations on the countryside, my grandparents were
               | involved in a business of selling timber that was felled
               | in some forests about 500 km away. The lumberjacks would
               | bring the logs during the summer months, lots of it
               | (maybe hundreds of cubic meters), and my grandparents
               | would sell it to whoever needed it throughout the year.
               | This was happening during Communism, so I guess it was
               | some form of under-the-tables Capitalism at work. I
               | imagine similar arrangements existed throughout the
               | Middle Ages.
               | 
               | [1] https://wanderingcows.wordpress.com/2014/05/02/the-
               | charcoal-...
        
               | phonebanshee wrote:
               | While it might be one of the last charcoal burning sites
               | locally, large-scale charcoal burning is an active
               | problem - https://www.unep.org/news-and-
               | stories/story/charcoal-burning....
        
               | Nick87633 wrote:
               | Sounds like a wholesaler/retailer arrangement.
        
               | thaumasiotes wrote:
               | > or exchanging the wood for charcoal from someone who
               | specialized in that
               | 
               | This is actually an interesting example of a market state
               | that's sort of intermediate between barter and full
               | monetization. Not everyone is going to want wood, making
               | it a bad currency. Except that The Charcoal Guy always
               | does want wood, so transactions that somehow involve him
               | suddenly can use wood as currency.
        
             | mbg721 wrote:
             | What was the purpose in making the customers give up the
             | opportunity to make spirits, if the charcoal wasn't any
             | more special? Was demand high and the blacksmiths wanted to
             | reduce the volume of low-priority requests?
        
               | credit_guy wrote:
               | I think the blacksmith simply needed that charcoal in
               | order to do the job. Since people didn't have charcoal
               | themselves, the blacksmith would take wood instead.
               | "Three plum trees" was probably one option, the most
               | relevant for the local population. I guess the blacksmith
               | would have been happy with "one large oak tree", but that
               | could be used for timber, while plum trees not so much.
        
             | inglor_cz wrote:
             | The venerable ACOUP blog says that in order to produce 1 kg
             | of iron, you would need 14,6 kg of charcoal, which
             | translates into 105 kg of raw wood.
             | 
             | https://acoup.blog/2020/09/25/collections-iron-how-did-
             | they-...
        
       | irrational wrote:
       | It's interesting to think about what my life might have been like
       | if I had been born 500 years earlier. I think carpenter or
       | stonemason are what I would have been most interested in. But I
       | really love books, so maybe I would have ended up in the clergy.
       | Thank goodness I was born now.
        
         | avgcorrection wrote:
         | I wonder what I would be born again as if rebirth was real.
         | Maybe a prince. Or maybe a Nobel Prize winning physicist...
         | 
         | You would likely have been a peasant. The veil of ignorance
         | doesn't even make exceptions for HN readers.
        
         | lokimedes wrote:
         | You would very likely have ended up with the same profession as
         | your father (assuming you are male).
        
       | AzzieElbab wrote:
       | Totally explains why the most common English last name is "Smith"
        
       | LambdaTrain wrote:
       | Just visualized this Montpellier as Oxenfurt in witcher 3
        
       | distribot wrote:
       | Cool website. I miss this kind of internet.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-12-06 23:01 UTC)