Live data from Hacker News

Medieval peasants got more vacation time than modern workers (2013)

blogs.reuters.com

221–226 of 226 posts

Re: Medieval peasants got more vacation time than modern workers (2013)

#221
post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, we still have religious people doing pilgrimages. Both christians and not. At least some of them sure do treat them as vacation. On top of that, plenty of people in medieval time were not that deeply religious. Even in clergy or among monks. Even including religious component, I don't really see how it differs much from e.g. pilgrimaging to music festivals. I've done quite a bit of traveling where solo task was…

To someone religiously devoted it's not an impractical diversion but something deeply practical. It seems to me in some sense more akin to traveling to a renowned hospital -- you might take in some sights while you are there, but diversion isn't the point.

So you're saying vacation is only if it's impractical and the diversion itself must be the point?

You might be conflating shightseeing and vacation as time-off. On top of that, you might want to look into how pilgrimage or other religious get togethers look like.

It's not like people come and pray and do nothing else. In most cases shopping and getting together with people from afar is involved. People have and always had natural needs like roof for the night and food. And rest during the day. If a bunch of people got together at night having a similar goal, they'll probably have a chat and maybe even party a little. There's a reason why many religious sights were surrounded by shopping and entertainment. Even a long time ago.

For example, the very simple act of sunday church. Back when traveling took time, it was certainly a day trip for rural people. It was pretty much a tiny conference or festival for them. That's why market square a frequently next to churches and markets are held on sunday. People come, shop, have a chat... And go to church while at it. I'm talking not only today, but from historical perspective too.

Talking about vacation only as "diversion", I guess quite a few of my vacations wouldn't count then. If I was going to a music festival, diversion itself wouldn't mean jackshit to me. I went to many festivals where I basically got to the location in cheapest possible way. Stayed on festival grounds and then got home in cheapest possible way. I saw no sights nor diversion itself was the point. But boy if it was vacation :)

Same about amateur racing. I get to the location, I race, get some food, sleep it off and go home. Sometimes terrain/location is part of signing up for the specific race. Sometimes I go there just because it's well organised and my friends are going. More likely than not no sights are seen nor I are about location aside from race track much.

Sometimes vacation is purely to get out of daily routine and jut spend time with myself. Diversion itself ain't the point either.

Re: Medieval peasants got more vacation time than modern workers (2013)

#222
post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To someone religiously devoted it's not an impractical diversion but something deeply practical. It seems to me in some sense more akin to traveling to a renowned hospital -- you might take in some sights while you are there, but diversion isn't the point.

So you're saying vacation is only if it's impractical and the diversion itself must be the point? You might be conflating shightseeing and vacation as time-off. On top of that, you might want to look into how pilgrimage or other religious get togethers look like. It's not like people come and pray and do nothing else. In most cases shopping and getting together with people from afar is involved. People have and alway…

Well I think you were saying that, a few posts ago, if you go back and look. You defined it as going someplace without "objective practical need."

I don't see how amateur racing and attending a concert can meaningfully be distinguished from diversions.

Re: Medieval peasants got more vacation time than modern workers (2013)

#223
post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you're saying vacation is only if it's impractical and the diversion itself must be the point? You might be conflating shightseeing and vacation as time-off. On top of that, you might want to look into how pilgrimage or other religious get togethers look like. It's not like people come and pray and do nothing else. In most cases shopping and getting together with people from afar is involved. People have and alway…

Well I think you were saying that, a few posts ago, if you go back and look. You defined it as going someplace without "objective practical need." I don't see how amateur racing and attending a concert can meaningfully be distinguished from diversions.

And how is traveling for religious purposes an "objective practical need"?

Sure, a super religious nut might make it one. But usually a closest church would provide a fix for that. Let alone that not all were super deeply religious in medieval ages.

What "objective practical need" do you see in Camino de Santiago? [0] It's more or less a spiritual journey, meditation shall I say? And a significant chunk of modern tourism is based on that too. I could definitely say I had "objective practical need" to go to certain concerts or do certain trips. I find especially the later is great way at maintaining mental health and finding peace with oneself.

There's a good saying by bikers that "all you need to solve a problem is a tank of gas". Does it make motorcycle riding (e.g. motorcycle roadtrip vacation) an "objective practical need"?

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camino_de_Santiago

Re: Medieval peasants got more vacation time than modern workers (2013)

#224
post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well I think you were saying that, a few posts ago, if you go back and look. You defined it as going someplace without "objective practical need." I don't see how amateur racing and attending a concert can meaningfully be distinguished from diversions.

And how is traveling for religious purposes an "objective practical need"? Sure, a super religious nut might make it one. But usually a closest church would provide a fix for that. Let alone that not all were super deeply religious in medieval ages. What "objective practical need" do you see in Camino de Santiago? [0] It's more or less a spiritual journey, meditation shall I say? And a significant chunk of modern tou…

I think you just are not capable of understanding religious thinking if you have to ask these questions. Try to put yourself in the shoes of someone premodern for whom God is every bit as real and present as the natural world. Even the most religious today are, in some respects, not on the same level as medieval people in this way.

Re: Medieval peasants got more vacation time than modern workers (2013)

#225
post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And how is traveling for religious purposes an "objective practical need"? Sure, a super religious nut might make it one. But usually a closest church would provide a fix for that. Let alone that not all were super deeply religious in medieval ages. What "objective practical need" do you see in Camino de Santiago? [0] It's more or less a spiritual journey, meditation shall I say? And a significant chunk of modern tou…

I think you just are not capable of understanding religious thinking if you have to ask these questions. Try to put yourself in the shoes of someone premodern for whom God is every bit as real and present as the natural world. Even the most religious today are, in some respects, not on the same level as medieval people in this way.

I think you're not capable of understanding religious thinking of medieval people.

Your average medieval peasant was much more afraid of his local nobility than of god. Good part of nobility was much more afraid of mortal repercussions rather than the underworld. And clergy... Let's say today's clergy with their scandals is not that different from medieval times.

Do you think protestantism could have happened if people were so deeply religious both towards god and church? Even though god was much more real to many more people, church (and to extent - pilgrimages and church mythology) was seen as separate from god in many cases. There was plenty of questioning going on throughout history.

This view may or may not be affected by the fact that christianity came to my country only in late medieval ages. And took couple hundred years to be established. With remains of the old worldview still surviving in popular culture. People were more than aware that church teaching is not the single one available.

Re: Medieval peasants got more vacation time than modern workers (2013)

#226
post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't get infection or disease because. 1- most of the people (and probably you too) are vaccinated and prevent the spreading of such disease. 2- Most of our current developed world is sanitize compare to back them 3- a cut could be lethal or could meant amputation in the middle age, now you just need to put alchool on it. 4- you might had suffer from malnutrition even has a monarch, lack of vitamin C could lead…

I can't help but feel that there is some mild trolling going on this thread :-) If not that, there are at least a couple of people who are seriously optimistic about their personal invulnerability in the absence of modern medicine, healthcare, and public health practices.

I think that things like herd immunity just aren't intuitively understood or respected by the people who think that just because they haven't had a health emergency in the modern world they haven't benefitted from their existence in the modern world.
Post reply on HN