I don't think the wage rise post-Black Death was so much "negotiation" as "peasant revolts".
Didn't they kill a whole bunch of peasants along the way?
In California there are various local government transparency laws that have been waived by executive order to allow for city councils and boards to meet and take comment online, and some of us are trying to get that flexibility written into law post-emergency as it makes everything so much more accessible.
Black Death killed at least 30% of Europe, probably much more. Even in the worst case Covid won't even be close.
We found a guy who lives in Colombia who will speak Spanish with our kids so they keep practicing while school's out. I don't know if he's a tutor with actual lesson plans so much as just a speaking partner. It costs $3/hour and that includes whatever fee the site that sets up the lesson (prep/ly) is taking. Our kids are very into it because we said they could just play minecraft together and talk about it in Spanish. We might offer to pay him more on the side to bring it up to $10/hour.
Colombia rang a bell, so I looked it up and confirmed the little food delivery robots in Berkeley (Kiwi) are also steered by Colombians. I wonder if Colombia has a leg up in this, like through better Internet access or something.
They need to rename the country. Let me be the first to suggest "Flavor Country."
The effect on income distribution so far has been excellent. The first and most successful U.S. government economic response to the pandemic was a massive income redistribution downward, $1200 for (almost) everyone with income below $75,000, and an enhanced unemployment benefits of $600/week on top of regular benefits through July. There were also various rent and mortgage deferment benefits, and incentives for employers to keep paying workers. Thanks, Pelosi!
If the Democrats control both Houses and the Presidency next year, more good stuff will follow, probably including paid sick leave and other improvements to the family Medical Leave Act.
The Black Death increased per capita wealth a great deal because land was the principle form of wealth (including for peasants or serfs who had property rights to a portion of their harvests on feudal properties), and the amount of land remained constant while the population decreased. Fewer mouths to feed per acre reduced malnutrition among the poor and permitted increased meat production and consumption among the not-quit-as-poor. Also having fewer people to feed, and fewer to farm, led to land laying fallow more frequently, and some replenishment of the soil. Don't expect any comparable effect this time around.
Is the commentariat familiar with economics history papers or books that could shed some light on how things played out in the past after major infectious disease events?
The idea that the Black Death opened up opportunities for those lower in the social hierarchy is one of those memes that on examination turns out to be "true in some places, false in others." Shockingly, England was one of the places where plague deaths did shake up the social structure. Unfortunately, most places on the continent were "not so much." Elites were good a putting down any effort to change the system, and so there was very little change.
Ada Palmer (of "Terra Ignota" fame) coincidentally wrote a long essay on this question, tying it in to the Covid-19 epidemic. (Her day job is that she's a historian specializing in the Renaissance.) It's a LONG read but worth it:
Black Death, COVID, and Why We Keep Telling the Myth of a Renaissance Golden Age and Bad Middle Ages
Ada Palmer (of "Terra Ignota" fame) coincidentally wrote a long essay on this question, tying it in to the Covid-19 epidemic. (Her day job is that she's a historian specializing in the Renaissance.) It's a LONG read but worth it:
That does look interesting (and LONG; I've just read the first 10%). Thanks for the link; I'm looking forward to reading it.
Speaking of history and long things to read, thank you to whoever it was that linked to the blog post about how Sparta sucked. I've been reading that blog since.
I read that Ada Palmer piece a while back; didn't realize it was her, but hooboy it's great. I mean, great. I learned a TON. Reading actual historians who know how to write, and want to educate the public, is just wonderful. They're able to burst so many myths .....
"Myth Bursters" would be a good name for a show that gets sued by a guy with a moustache and a hat.
14. That would be me. I love passing on history nerd stuff! I love it even more when someone actually likes it!
I have the sense that all the details in 9 could be true, while "excellent" is still overstating things. "Better than expected but still pretty damn bad" might be more accurate.
According to what I've read, the first wave of the Black Death did indeed increase rural living standards in some places (not all), but then a second wave a few years later killed a bunch more people and undid all the gains. Additional waves continued to come and go for centuries, and living standards didn't fully recover until the seventeenth century.
And the slight gains from the first wave were a strictly rural phenomenon. Cities were devastated across the board, and some lost well over 50% of their population.
14. That would be me. I love passing on history nerd stuff! I love it even more when someone actually likes it!
I enjoyed it too. But what was the link? I no longer have that tab open.
That ties in with what Palmer wrote about plague becoming endemic in Western Europe between 1350 and 1550, only tapering off as the population eventually evolved resistance.
That Palmer piece looks interesting. I guess I must be really steeped in the medievalist mindset at this point, because my first reaction was "wait, people still think the Renaissance was good?" But out in the real world, of course they do.
I read the first 4 entries of the Sparta discussion, found all of them interesting but also felt drained by the terribleness of much of it. But I do want to go back and re-read the rest, so this is a good reminder.
You could read the ones about fictional armies.
As it happens I've been dipping into Devereaux's series on "The Fremen Mirage." Pretty good stuff.
AFAICT (I haven't read the Palmer, but I've read other things) some of the pushback on "Black Death led to higher wages" is pedantry (if Black Death=>peasant revolt=>higher wages, then saying "it wasn't Black Death" is, well...), some of it is turning "that wasn't true everywhere" into "that isn't true", and some of it is righteous pushback against Econ 101 history that overstates how wrong Econ 101 was. But hardly anybody likes to lead with "the popular story you know is reasonably accurate for some places, but let me tell you about others." They want to lead with "that popular story is bullshit."
You appear to be asking for Lecture 5 from my Econ 135 course...
Unfortunately, I only have the slides--I have not yet transcribed and cleaned up the lecture transcript yet...
https://github.com/braddelong/public-files/blob/master/econ-135-lecture-5.pdf
You can also look at the source that I stole my lecture from: Harvard Professor Melissa Dell, who is an absolute BOSS on all this: https://github.com/braddelong/public-files/blob/master/slides-dell-malthus.pdf
Mustn't appear too fanboy-ish. Mustn't appear to fanboy-ish.
He showed up! He showed up!
*grin*
Historians hate generalities. Historians would consider something that's 90% true as "false". Though to be fair, there are results in mathematics that are true 100% of the time, and it's still an open question of whether they are true or false.
The Renaissance article was interesting, but a little odd. Death rates in the Renaissance were high because economic growth and greater trade led to advances in military technology and greater disease spread. I mean, economic growth and greater trade were the reasons why they called the Renaissance a golden age... It's interesting that life expectancy dropped, but it doesn't completely upend everything I knew about the Renaissance.
I always find the defenses of the Middle Ages odd, as well. Medievalists seems genuinely offended that people say mean things about the Middle Ages, and often slip into apologetics.
32: You just need a worldwide pandemic, and then he has nothing better to do. Keep it in mind for the future, if you ever become a supervillain.
But hardly anybody likes to lead with "the popular story you know is reasonably accurate for some places, but let me tell you about others." They want to lead with "that popular story is bullshit."
I have read soooo many histories that organize chapters in the following pattern:
1) Announce a well-known interpretation, although in an implausibly strong form that nobody actually believes. (Eg the: Battle of Britain took place, was a strategically decisive British victory, and was entirely down to RAF fighter pilots, who were all English and exclusively equipped with Spitfires. The wider empire had no role, nor did RAF Bomber Command, the RAF's ground services, the Royal Navy, or the British Army.)
2) Denounce it as a myth, ideally insinuating morally despicable motives.
3) Start introducing sources.
4) With the sources, introduce caveats.
5) By the end of the chapter, admit quietly, in the face of overwhelming source evidence, that the well-known interpretation in the form anyone actually believes it is mostly right.
6) It's time for another chapter!
It's so common, and so much a matter of editing, that I wonder if it's publishers' readers and editors who are the vectors, and it's an artefact of the industry in the same way as all movies end up adopting a three act structure and doing Save the Cat.
Historians would consider something that's 90% true as "false". Though to be fair, there are results in mathematics that are true 100% of the time, and it's still an open question of whether they are true or false.
And 100% of mathematicians would consider something that's only 90% true to be false.
Statistics classes are like that.
1. This is the way to get a biased estimate
2. This is a way to get a different but similar, biased estimate
3. This gives the right answer, but only if the hoses are Prussian
4. This is the right way but the contrast statement can only be understood by the pure of heart.
Antimony bronze just isn't the same.
Hoses worked just as well for me. That's why I never got to step 4 in stats classes, I guess.
The history of science requires horses.
How are you doing, Walt?
29. Thanks, that's generous to share! I'd be interested in slides for the next one, I'm interested in the Roman economy. Was losing Tunisian grain the main disaster?
Plus there is my old teacher David Herlihy's great very little book on the Black Death & the Transformation of Europe...
https://github.com/braddelong/public-files/blob/master/readings/selections-herlihy-black-death.pdf
For the ability to maintain the imperial structure in the west, yes, the loss of Tunisian grain was the coup de grace. But there was lots more going on...
https://github.com/braddelong/public-files/blob/master/econ-135-lecture-7.pdf (fall of Rome, & c.)
https://github.com/braddelong/public-files/blob/master/econ-135-lecture-6.pdf (rise of Rome, & c.)
https://github.com/braddelong/public-files/blob/master/econ-135-lecture-3.pdf (Malthusian patterns, & c.)
||
No opinions from the US Supreme Court today, but they took cert on some cases -- cliffhangers for next season:
* Can foreigners sue foreign governments here over Holocaust expropriations? Hungary and Germany say no.
* Can former child slaves sue the US corporate parents of the cocoa plantations where they were worked? Nestle, ADM, Cargill say no.
* Can the House Judiciary Committee get some of the redacted stuff from the Mueller Report? Who even cares -- the result is now postponed until after the election.
This should probably have gone in the abolition thread. The GOP, obviously, but also bullshit third parties, and their argument that well so what if the GOP does get power, that's just a sacrifice that needs to be made to keep our stupid fantasies alive.
|>
43: I'm okay, thanks for asking. My symptoms are starting to subside, but Jesus Christ am I obsessed with food now. I think about it all the time. It's weird to just not eat for almost two weeks now.
* Can former child slaves sue the US corporate parents of the cocoa plantations where they were worked? Nestle, ADM, Cargill say no.
Well they would say that, wouldn't they?
So at the risk of derailing: Was private wealth creation outside the state possible in Rome? That is, were there markets for (say) grain or oil from a latifundium such that it was possible to save and buy more land to run well and earn more, etc? I think the answer is no-- as far as I know, Roman writing about land doesn't include mention of good access to roads or rivers as a part of the value.
There are a couple of books about Ostia and its harbor based on the excavations around 1940-- by Mieggs and by Hermansen, they're old-- has anyone read either of them? What about analysis of the olive trade in Hispania? Looks like there was excavation of that huge mountain of amphorae in the 80s, anyone know if there's anything well-written about that? Spanish or French is OK, but I can't read Italian.
Oh also, why are there business cycles if markets are kind of efficient ?
That is, were there markets for (say) grain or oil from a latifundium such that it was possible to save and buy more land to run well and earn more, etc?
IIRC yes, enough that overfarming for market profits caused erosion we can still see in the silt fans of rivers, but it's a while since I read Dirt: The Erosion of Civilizations.
49: What makes it worse is that the people around me insist on selfishly eating, just because they will die. Is that fair, I ask you?
51: Brad may have a more sophisticated answer, but I think you can summarize the current macroeconomic literature as "Because they are also kind of not." Recent macro papers start with "Assume that we have these four different kinds of market inefficiency. How long do recessions last?"
If markets were perfectly efficient, then bad things would still happen -- the COVID shock is a very clear example -- but the recovery would be immediate, even without government intervention. Since markets aren't perfectly efficient, there are knock on effects.
50: Yes. State spending was central but not everything. The landed rich affected disdain for trade, but they (or at least their managers) certainly engaged in it.
Was there any effect of various outbreaks in the US? Yellowfever, for example?
IIRC the suppression of yellow fever (and other things) is given some credit for the postwar development of the South. But that's endemic, not outbreaks.
47: Subsiding symptoms is good at least? And you can plan what you're going to eat when you're allowed to start again.
IIRC the suppression of yellow fever (and other things) is given some credit for the postwar development of the South. But that's endemic, not outbreaks.
Also hookworm.
The 1793 Philadelphia yellow fever epidemic was hugely consequential in a bunch of different ways. I haven't read anything about its economic effects but I'm sure they've been studied.
Other epidemics that probably had big impacts on US history are smallpox in the 1770s, cholera in the 1830s, yellow fever in 1878 (mostly in New Orleans and other parts of the deep south), and plague around 1900. Plus of course the 1918 flu.
47: Oh god, I'm glad you're doing better. Peg tubes suck.
60: Historian! I bid you expound.
I haven't read a whole lot about it since it's a bit peripheral to my main research project (not a lot of Native Americans left in Philadelphia by 1793!), but from what I have read it seems that it probably played a role in Philadelphia's decline as the premier city of the new republic. At the time it was both the political and commercial capital of the country, but it would soon lose the former position to Washington and the latter to New York. The political capital move was part of an already established plan, of course, but there was no reason at the time that it had to also lose its commercial prominence. The yellow fever terrified everyone, though; there hadn't been an epidemic of it in like 30 years so it was an unfamiliar and obviously very deadly scourge. Basically everyone who had the means to get out of town did to ride it out somewhere else, so the city was largely empty except for the already infected and the very poor, and while it subsided during the winter the fever came back each summer for several years so a fair amount of that outmigration probably ended up being permanent.
It also caused a crisis in the medical community, which couldn't figure out what was causing the disease or where it came from and was bitterly divided between camps promoting local versus foreign origin, which also roughly corresponded to political leanings. There was a lot of xenophobia over the recent influx of French immigrants associated with the Revolutions in both France itself and Haiti, and the idea that the yellow fever was imported (which turned out to be correct) aligned well with this view. The alternative view, more in line with a lot of traditional medical thinking at the time, associated the disease with an unhealthy environment and in turn with urbanization and a supposed breakdown of traditional morality. But the practical issue of how to treat it was also a matter of contention among doctors, and it spurred one of the most prominent, Benjamin Rush, to develop his "American system" of medicine, which posited that all epidemics were ultimately the result of a single disease which could be treated by massive bloodletting. This was totally wrong, of course, but very influential in the development of medicine in America. It also inspired Noah Webster to write a massive history of epidemics throughout all time that was also very influential, though not to the extent of his later dictionary.
So yeah, lots of social and cultural impacts. I'm sure the economic impacts were big too, but like I said I haven't read much about them.
Most of that is from this article. There's a vast literature on this so I don't know how widespread its perspective is, but it was definitely interesting.
64: is that what they mean when they talk about Chestnut St as the original Wall St?
64: I had been blaming Eagles fans.
66: Yes, Philadelphia was the first American city to develop a robust banking industry, aided in part by the presence there of the First (and Second) Bank of the US. The shift of the financial industry to New York was gradual over the course of the early nineteenth century and there were many factors involved, but the epidemic was probably one of them.
Benjamin Rush's house was used to be near where my grandmother lived, until it was accidentally knocked over by a bulldozer. I think that tells you everything you need to know about the city of Philadelphia.
They may have just been trying to burn out the people inside.
I finally read the Palmer post linked in 12. It's quite good.
"Was private wealth creation outside the state possible in Rome?"
Why wouldn't it be? There were very rich men in Rome and they can't all have got that way by looting. Crassus made part of his fortune through reselling property seized by the state but he also made money from silver mines and property development.
70: I have never gotten a clear description of what happened. I remember as a kid hearing "the city tore it down by mistake". How do you tear down a historical landmark by mistake?
I'm going to pitch "What really happened to the Benjamin Rush house" as the premise in a future National Treasure movie.
Across the street from where the house was is an now-closed insane asylum, which will also be central to the plot.
it spurred one of the most prominent, Benjamin Rush, to develop his "American system" of medicine, which posited that all epidemics were ultimately the result of a single disease which could be treated by massive bloodletting. This was totally wrong, of course, but very influential in the development of medicine in America.
Have to say, this guy doesn't sound like he was a tremendous benefit to his country and the world, when you net it all out. (In that respect of course he resembles basically all physicians from ancient Greece to about 1850 or so.)
Thanks teo and whoever linked Palmer.
Pro-tip: If you use massive bloodletting as a treatment for Covid, you can cut down on the number of deaths attributed to Covid.
|| Assholes . Jesus. End capitalism now
|>