Voit lisätä twiitteihisi sijainnin, esimerkiksi kaupungin tai tarkemman paikan, verkosta ja kolmannen osapuolen sovellusten kautta. Halutessasi voit poistaa twiittisi sijaintihistorian myöhemmin. Lue lisää
Sometimes when reading the scholarship on a historical production process, answering simple questions can be so maddeningly difficult. In this case: was wool sorted, then sold? Or sold, and then sorted? (Answer: both, but mostly the former, as far as I can tell)
I know that no treatment of an entire production chain can include every fact or detail, but the frequency with which, say, 'the wool trade' is discussed in the absence of a discussion of the evidence for the mechanics of that trade or the workers in it is always frustrating.
Obviously this is something I am trying to do a bit differently in the 'How Did They Make It" series - I try to stop at every stage and ask "who is doing this work?" (thus the need to know if sorting is happening at point-of-production, or point-of-consumption)...
...but those details are often surprisingly hard to run down in the specialist literature on the topic, all too frequently forsaken for either a discussion of the upper-level merchants and trade, or a ground-level look at tools and artifacts.
To what extent does your research include current wool-workers? Of course things aren't all the same (techniques, tools, etc), but as a modern handspinner I only buy skirted fleeces, because fleece is sold by the pound and I don't want to pay for sheep poo.
Can we responsibly assume the same for pre-modern wool workers, in the absence of contradictory information? Very curious about your methodology. Thanks!pic.twitter.com/YFQjzRyvO1
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.
