Live data from Hacker News

The daily life of a medieval king

medievalists.net

131–140 of 175 posts

Re: The daily life of a medieval king

#131
post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

75 years ago someone in my position would have had a secretary - she (sexism intended) would have covered about 4 others. My boss would have had a personal secretary. Today Outlook (or similar programs) do the majority of what she would have done and they do it better. I can book an airline ticket myself in the time it would take to explain what I really want to the secretary.

I think you are mistaken, because you have made a category error. The work of a personal secretary or an assistant isn't merely to book you an airline ticket or manage your calendar. These are part of it, yes, but not the entirety and even in those you are missing the nuance of it. Their job is to understand you, and act on your behalf in the matters you delegate, knowing what outcome you would choose yourself. This…

> Their job is to understand you, and act on your behalf in the matters you delegate, knowing what outcome you would choose yourself.

And that works very well even today when you are high enough to get a personal secretary. For the engineer who always shared the secretary with several others she didn't know you as well, and in any case their preferences were not important enough to consider (you don't get first class options).

Even for my boss, outlook is a force multiplier over a secretary because he (happens to be he today, has been she in the past, and likely will be again in a few years) doesn't have very many things where knowing preferences matter and doesn't have such complex scheduling needs that a human needs to do it. The ability to schedule his own meetings is much more powerful than asking someone to do it - while it might take more time to do it he can see that by not inviting one person the meeting can be had sooner and that is a much greater multiplier than the time saves by having someone else who not knowing those details delays the meeting until everyone can be there.

Yes when your situation is such that a secretary can "understand you, and act on your behalf in the matters you delegate, knowing what outcome you would choose yourself" it is a force multiplier. However most of us are not really that different from anyone else and even where we are we are not allowed the level of differentiation. We also don't have nearly the ability to delegate things, much less enough things that someone else can delegate them on our behalf. And so for most of us outlook is a force multiplier over the secretary we would get.

Re: The daily life of a medieval king

#132
post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> pickling, salting Yes, but also my understanding is that the preservation technique of that name involves much more salt than modern palettes are willing to tolerate, and also salt itself was much more limited in supply. Despite this, salt as a preservative was indeed critical to civilisation. > fermenting True, and also I want to say "blessed are the cheesemakers" etc. here. :)

Also because salt itself was much more valuable back then you wouldn't have as much or even any salt in your fresh food so you use the "preserved in an intolerable amount of salt" food products with the unsalted food products to get a quite tolerable middle ground at consumption time. Mash potatoes and pickle bits mmm

> Mash potatoes and pickle bits mmm

And thus potatoes and sauerkraut was born.

Re: The daily life of a medieval king

#133

This is less historical record than medieval propaganda piece. I get that it was written as such but even the article at the beginning pretends it’s an accurate representation of what the king got up to and then towards the end tacitly admits it’s an idealized representation of how a king should behave. This basically brings into question all of the actual details. Did he go to church every morning ? Maybe it was dee…

Given all the matters that a head of state has to attend to I would be surprised if they found time to go to church once a week, much less daily. Even with an on-site priest.

As for listening to commoners, I'll accept the possibility of kings that wanted to be accountable to their subjects. The problem isn't the king, it's the nobility. The nobles are going to be filtering the commoners that get to talk to the king, because the king isn't allowed to know any commoners directly. Hell, they might not even be able to speak the same language at all. England's kings all spoke either French or German for a long time, and French wasn't so much the language of France as much as it was the language that France's ruling class spoke[0].

Even if the king could understand commoners and had unfiltered access to them, it's not guaranteed that they could do anything with that feedback. Say, a peasant complained about what they pay to their lord. Does the king actually have the power to overrule the nobility? Will the nobility depose the king, or start a civil war that destabilizes the country?

The game everyone's playing is ultimately to convince subsistence farmers to "go big or go home" - i.e. to overplant and overproduce food, at the risk of crop failure, so that the state can seize some of that food and eat it themselves, nominally in exchange for "protection"[1] from rival states whose main difference is that their king is fake while yours is rightful. In other words: the king and nobility are wolves, the commoners are sheep, and it's bad form for predators to befriend their prey.

[0] At least until France erased their own minority languages in the 1800s and forced everyone to speak French, which I'm pretty sure counts as genocide

[1] Identical to the 'protection' paid to a mafioso

Re: The daily life of a medieval king

#134
post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We've seen this recently in British and Japanese royal families. Some people just don't want it, and to get a normal life they have to leave the monarchy.

This is reminding me of folk tales where the king, prince or princess disguises themselves and goes among the commoners, but I can't name a definite example of the trope at the moment.

Clark Kent.

Re: The daily life of a medieval king

#135
post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> pickling, salting Yes, but also my understanding is that the preservation technique of that name involves much more salt than modern palettes are willing to tolerate, and also salt itself was much more limited in supply. Despite this, salt as a preservative was indeed critical to civilisation. > fermenting True, and also I want to say "blessed are the cheesemakers" etc. here. :)

Also because salt itself was much more valuable back then you wouldn't have as much or even any salt in your fresh food so you use the "preserved in an intolerable amount of salt" food products with the unsalted food products to get a quite tolerable middle ground at consumption time. Mash potatoes and pickle bits mmm

Without the potatoes, they hadn't arrived from the Americas by this point.

Re: The daily life of a medieval king

#136
post #13

[flagged]

[flagged]

Hard disagree. Boredom is the consequence of a disengaged mind. Seems like his life was pretty fulfilling, with new music and entertainment, new people to meet and talk to, and new issues to solve, and when he did get bored I'm sure he had ample opportunities to do new things and take on new endeavors to satiate his mental appetite.

Re: The daily life of a medieval king

#139

This is less historical record than medieval propaganda piece. I get that it was written as such but even the article at the beginning pretends it’s an accurate representation of what the king got up to and then towards the end tacitly admits it’s an idealized representation of how a king should behave. This basically brings into question all of the actual details. Did he go to church every morning ? Maybe it was dee…

> This is less historical record than medieval propaganda piece

I think you could make a good case that the title is a little sensationalistic, but you could pick at US civics class in exactly the same way (and not just in recent history). The branches of government we learn about fail to include (or at least emphasize) the fundamental role of regulatory capture, lobbyists, and opaque/undemocratic three-letter agencies in real-world governance. Not to mention the fact that even the founding of the country was based on high ideals that were highly caveat-ed ("all men are created equal" unless those men are property).

Regardless of the extent to which ideals are lived out in practice, to many people it's notable that those ideals are there at all. In my experience as a US citizens, most people educated here seem shocked to learn that there can be any ideals behind monarchy besides divine right of kings/"I am the state" [1].

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L%27%C3%89tat,_c%27est_moi

Re: The daily life of a medieval king

#140
post #74

That's a fascinating treatise. It also paints Charles in quite a good light. I assume that she wrote to please, but it also sounds like he was a genuinely good king. I have heard that the best form of government is an absolute monarchy, and the worst form of government is an absolute monarchy.

Re your last paragraph: can’t this be said about any form of government since there will be any kind of variation independent of form?

It means the variation in monarchy is higher. So the best monarchy is better than the best democracy, but the worst monarchy is worse than the worst democracy
Post reply on HN