Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Common Jobs in a Medieval City

medievalists.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 193 posts

Re: Common Jobs in a Medieval City

#41

Post by WFHRenaissance »

bruce343434 wrote: post #17
thedailymail wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the parent quote may be in reference to David Graeber's commentary on "bullshit jobs".

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 ser…

> 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 :)

Re: Common Jobs in a Medieval City

#42

Post by telesilla »

mysterydip wrote: post #23
dmurray wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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/

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.

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.

Re: Common Jobs in a Medieval City

#43

Post by guythedudebro »

Xylakant wrote: post #15
MikeTaylor wrote: post #4

Striking that there were more shoemakers than tailors.

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.

I'm amused and perplexed at your choice of the word "cobble" there

Re: Common Jobs in a Medieval City

#44

Post by usrusr »

mastazi wrote: post #32

6th to 10th place are interesting: 6 – Tailors 7 – Notaries 8 – Barbers 9 – Retailers 10 – Stonemasons More notaries than barbers, retailers and stonemasons!

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.

Re: Common Jobs in a Medieval City

#45

Post by brianwawok »

kwhitefoot wrote: post #29
bruce343434 wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

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 ca…

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, ???

Re: Common Jobs in a Medieval City

#47

Post by sillyquiet »

mysterydip wrote: post #23
dmurray wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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/

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.

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.

Re: Common Jobs in a Medieval City

#48

Post by errcorrectcode »

everyone wrote: post #2

I wonder what the most common jobs are in a modern city. Probably all bullshit.

"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.

Re: Common Jobs in a Medieval City

#49

Post by wildzzz »

honkdaddy wrote: post #28
dmurray wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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/

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 peasant…

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.

Re: Common Jobs in a Medieval City

#50

Post by dmurray »

qw wrote: post #22
dmurray wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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/

The shoemakers also repaired and maintained shoes. They would replace soles, repair holes etc.

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.
Post reply on HN