World History
Related: About this forumMy interest in history is the mundane detail of everyday life
What people ate, how they came by it, how they cooked it. What they wore and how they prepared their garments. How did they build their houses, why they were sited in a particular way.
History seems to be passed down to us as a sucession of battles and conquests. As today, the common people are divorced from the excuses to go to war yet they are the victims of power lusts, land grabs and violence.
To have a real understanding of history we must look beyond the warlords. The actions of the greedy and power-hungry have written most of our history from times BC until the present day. The lives of peasants, serfs, labourers (lay brothers) give us a glimpse of how the wealthy took command of the single most important resource in early industrialism: the labour of workers.
Richard Arkwright precipitated the modern industrial age with his steam and water powered cotton mills. At the same time, English landowners were realizing that having families of tenant farmers was not a paying concern and it was more profitable to turn large swathes of land over to managers to dedicate it to cattle, sheep or other types of specialised farming.
Tenant farmers, thrown off their land had no option but to move to the cities, find employment in mills and take the best accommodation available. Thus the advent of slumlords.
Nowadays, history is taught as a linear sequence of battles and conquests. Little attention is paid to the vast majority (yes the 99%) who had no say in their future, no choice but to follow the work.
My particular interest in history is industrialisation and its effects on the working populace. Greed, avoiding laws, taking advantage of the vulnerable are not new character traits. They have been evident since the beginning of written history. It seems humans have changed very little in five or six thousand years.
The rise of unions did a great deal to alleviate the utter misery of the 'industrialised' worker. Progress was slow as it was opposed at every step by the influential factory owners; their wealth was a direct result of cheap labour. Wanting to appear 'great beneficiaries' of the workers, they built cheap accommodation for their workers but did not baulk at several families sharing a room or basement with no water, light or sewerage. They had done their bit!
These are the people who truly represent our history. Not the warlords, the kings or the generals but the common working person.
OffWithTheirHeads
(10,337 posts)Aside from being an excellent read on so many levels about Southern culture and why so many are still fighting the "War of Northern Agression" the author follows some diehard reinactors who are obsessive about re creating the conditions of the average person, primarily soldiers but others also from that time period.
I recently completed building a re creation of a rifle that would have been in use during that time period. One of the things a number of my friends commented on was how small and tight the butstock was. It didn't make sense until I learned from this book that the average soldier in that time weighed about 130#.
it's the one on the top.
dixiegrrrrl
(60,011 posts)Sorry it took me so long to find this page.
RZM
(8,556 posts)Not sure who came up with that quote, but I've heard it numerous times. That's probably the single biggest problem when talking about this kind of thing. History is always dependent on the sources available. Since for most of history literacy was largely confined to the upper strata of society, there's a paucity of information on how regular people lived. There's actually a lot of interest in this, but there's only so much we can know, given the sources that are out there.
ellisonz
(27,739 posts)...and likewise can't recall the originator. I've fallen into the trap myself of overreaching in sources to try and construct what I think might have been said - sometimes I was somewhat successful in constructing a useful analysis, other times I was just shooting in the dark.
zipplewrath
(16,692 posts)Look back in time and the further one goes, the less important generals, and battles, and to some extent rulers, become. Yes, there is always a smattering of Ceasars. But Archimedes, Pythagorus, Voltaire, and other learned men tend to sustain more recognition in history.
I'm a bit like you suggest in that i LOVE reading the history of simple things, like forks, and clocks, and paper clips. There's alot of history in how men came to use "safety razors", not to mention the zipper.
If you truly want to know an era and location, dispense with the grandiose.
dixiegrrrrl
(60,011 posts)Right now I am reading Liza Picard's books on life in Britain during 1700's, and during the Victorian age.
the book on the Victorian Age is twice as thick as the book on 1700's, showing the increase in public sources.
About half the book of the 1799's is drawn from one newspaper that was published during the time.
all books are chockful of .."wow..I did not know that".
Picard, Liza. Restoration London (London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1997) ISBN 0-297-81900-3
Picard, Liza. Dr. Johnson's London (London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 2000) ISBN 0-297-84218-8
Picard, Liza. Elizabeth's London (London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 2003) ISBN 0-297-60729-4
Picard, Liza. Victorian London (London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 2005) ISBN 0-297-84733-3
OffWithTheirHeads
(10,337 posts)dixiegrrrrl
(60,011 posts)Which is a nice big juicy book, the interesting of the titles.
The Dr. Johnson book is not as big, and I may have been disappointed if I had started there.
Reading is easy and quite interesting, you can stop and start at your leisure.
Victorian England helped me grasp Dickens and Trollope and Austen a lot better.
The real fun is in the bibliography, lots of fascinating titles, of themselves. Many can be found at archive.org, as e-books or pdfs.
Hope you have fun with the books!