My economic model is based on the valuation of an "unworked" acre of agricultural land (including meadow) at 8d.
Each acre requires 8 days heavy labor (4d value at 0.5d per day) to plow, plant, and harvest.
This puts the production value of one acre at 12d (1 shilling).


DEMOGRAPHICS

There are 3 age categories:
Young (under 18): 40% of pop, Provide 1% (of 22%) heavy labor + 4% (of 28%) light labor
Adult (18-50): 40% of pop, Provide 20% (of 22%) heavy labor + 20% (of 28%)light labor
Old (51+): 20% of pop, Provide 1% (of 22%) heavy labor + 4% (of 28%) light labor

Heavy labor is provided by men. Light labor can be provided by men, women, children, or the elderly.
Based on above numbers, 22% of the pop is available for heavy labor, while 28% of the pop is available for light labor.
This means 50% of the population is able to contribute some type of labor to the economy.

The standard agricultural work-year is 250 days/person. Thus, the maximum days labor for 5 people is 1250 days.
To find labor available per family of 5, we multiply 1250 x 22% (for heavy labor) and 1250 x 28% (for light labor).
The family of 5 has 275 days heavy labor and 350 days light labor available.
The family needs 100 days light labor (25 days per basic support unit, see below) for domestic work (cooking, cleaning).
This means the family has 275 days heavy labor and 250 days light labor available.

A "Hide" is my economic unit (see below). It consists of 4 families.
Thus, the labor available to a Hide of 4 families is: 1100 days heavy labor + 1000 days light labor.


AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION (per acre)

Spring Field (1/3 of grain fields)
Barley, 480 pds pottage, 8 days heavy, 12d/acre, 40 pds/d
Barley, 480 gallons ale + 400 pds feed, 8 days heavy + 24 days light (brew), 20d/acre (+3d feed), 24 gallons/d
Oats, 360 pds (1 pd/day for horses), 8 days heavy, 12d/acre, 30 pds/d

Fall Field (1/3 of grain fields)
Wheat/Rye (mixed), 300 pds mixed flour + 200 pds feed, 8 days heavy + 16 days light (mill) OR pay miller 2d to grind, 15d/acre (+1d feed), 20 pds/d
Wheat (pure), 240 pds wheat flour + 200 pds feed, 8 days heavy + 16 days light (mill) OR pay miller 2d to grind, 15d/acre (+1d feed), 16 pds/d

Fallow Field (1/3 of grain fields)
Peas, 160 pds peas + 200 pds feed, 8 days heavy, 1.6d/acre (+1d feed), 100 pds/d

Other Crops
Flax/Hemp, 120 square yards linen/canvas, 8 days heavy + 96 days light (weave), 40d/acre, 3 yards/d
Herbs, 64 pds dried herbs, 8 days heavy + 12 days light (cure), 16d/acre, 4 pds/d

Garden
Vegetables, 1600 pds veg + 600 pds feed, 8 days heavy + 12 days light (tend), 16d/acre, 100 pds/d

Orchards
Apples, 1500 pds apples, 8 days heavy, 12d/acre, 125 pds/d
Apples, 120 gallons cider + 600 pds feed, 8 days heavy + 24 days light (ferment), 20d/acre (+3d feed), 6 gallons/d
Grapes (same as apples)
Grapes (wine) (same as cider)
Olives, 20 gallons olive oil + 600 pds feed, 8 days heavy + 24 days light (press), 20d/acre (+3d feed), 1 gallon/d
Tree Nuts, 120 pds tree nuts, 8 days heavy, 12d/acre, 10 pds/d

Woods
Firewood, 0.5 cord (60 cubic feet), 3 days heavy, 2d
Timber, 20,000 board feet timber, 100 days heavy, 200d/acre, 100 board ft/d

Meadow/Pasture
Meadow (Hay), 4000 pds hay, 8 days heavy, 12d/acre
Pasture, 2000 pds grass, 6d/acre

PASTORAL PRODUCTION (per animal)

Oxen
Production: 50 pds beef (6d at 8 pds/d), 1 square yard leather (4d at 0.25 yard/d)
Cost: 1 acre meadow, 2 acres pasture, 6 days heavy (2 care, 2 meat, 2 hide) + 4 days light (feed)

Cows (includes 1 calf per cow)
Production: 150 pds cheese (25d at 6 pds/d), 100 pds beef (12.5d at 8 pds/d), 1.5 square yard leather (6d at 0.25 yard/d)
Cost: 1.5 acres meadow, 0.5 acre pasture, 8 days heavy (1 care, 4 meat, 3 hide) + 18 days light (feed + cheese)

Pigs
Production: 150 pds pork (12.5d at 12 pds/d)
Cost: 800 pds feed (+2 acres woods for foraging), 6 days heavy (meat) + 6 days light (feed)

Sheep
Production: 20 pds mutton (2d at 10 pds/d), 15 pds cheese (2.5d at 6 pds/d), 3 square yards wool (2d at 1.5 yards/d)
Cost: 0.1 acre meadow, 0.2 acre pasture, 2 days heavy (1 meat, 1 wool) + 4 days light (weave + cheese)

Chickens (includes 1 hen and 12 chicks raised as broilers - 6 weeks each)
Production: 75 eggs (1.25d at 60 eggs/d), 25 pds fowl (1.75d at 15 pds/d)
Cost: 150 pds feed, 2 days heavy (2 meat) + 3 days light (feed + eggs)

Beehive
Production: 9 gallons honey (4.5d at 2 gal/d)
Cost: 30 acres available land, 2 days heavy + 4 days light (strain)


BASIC UNIT OF SUPPORT (0.25L)

Basic Support for Adult Male
7.5d Ale (180 gallons at 24 gallons/d, amounts to 0.5 gallons per day - 400 calories)
3d Cider (18 gallons at 6 gallons/d, amounts to 0.4 pint per day - 100 calories)
10d Mixed Flour (200 pounds at 20 pounds/d, amounts to 8.5 ounces bread per day - 850 calories)
3d Barley/Pottage (120 pounds at 40 pounds/d, amounts to 5 ounces pottage per day - 500 calories)
1.25d Peas (125 pounds peas at 100 pounds/d, amounts to 5 ounces peas per day - 75 calories)
1.25d Vegetables (125 pounds veg at 100 pounds/d, amounts to 5 ounces veg per day - 75 calories)
2d Cheese (12 pounds cheese at 6 pounds/d, amounts to 0.5 ounce cheese per day - 50 calories)
2d Beef (16 pounds beef at 8 pounds/d, amounts to 0.7 ounce beef per day - 45 calories)
2.5d Mutton (24 pounds mutton at 10 pounds/d, amounts to 1 ounce mutton per day - 60 calories)
4d Pork (48 pounds pork at 12 pounds/d, amounts to 2 ounces pork per day - 120 calories)
3.25d Fowl (48 pounds fowl at 15 pounds/d, amounts to 2 ounces fowl per day - 100 calories)
2.25d Eggs (135 eggs at 60 eggs/d, amounts to 0.375 egg per day - 25 calories)
2d Tree Nuts (19 pounds tree nuts at 10 pounds/d, amounts to 0.8 ounce nuts per day - 100 calories)
0.5d Honey (1 gallon honey at 2 gallons/d, amounts to 0.33 ounce honey per day - 30 calories)
0.5d Herbs (2 pds herbs at 4 pds/d, amounts to 0.08 ounces herbs per day)
0.5d Mixed Flour (10 pounds mixed flour, traded for salt at 5 pds/d)
1d Wheat Flour (16 pounds wheat flour, traded for salt at 5 pds/d)
1d Beef (8 pounds beef, traded for salt at 5 pds/d)
0.5d Mutton (6 pounds mutton, traded for salt at 5 pds/d)
1d Linen/Canvas (3 square yards linen/canvas at 3 yards/d)
2d Wool (3 square yards wool at 1.5 yard/d)
1d Leather (0.25 yards leather at 0.25 yards/d)
2d Firewood (0.5 cord firewood at 0.25 cord/d)
6d Cheese (36 pounds cheese, discretionary spending)


Support Breakdown
0.2L (48d) food/salt + 0.05L (12d) cloth/leather/firewood/discretionary
2130 calories food/cider + 400 calories ale. Provides 400 of the 2130 calories in animal protein.
Note, discretionary spending equals 10% of support (6d for 60d basic support).


SUPPORT FOR FAMILIES

Poor Support (0.75L, Basic Support x3)
Average calories per adult: 1950 + ale
Family of 4: Head of house 51d, Wife 51d, Relative 51d, Youth 27d
Discretionary Spending (18d): 12d on extra food (brings calories up from 1800 to 1950), 3d on manorial clothing, 3d in town

Average Support (1L, Basic Support x4)
Average calories per adult: 2130 + ale
Family of 5: Head of house 60d, Wife 60d, Relative 60d, 2 Youth at 30d each
Discretionary Spending (24d): 6d on manorial clothing, 18d in town

Good Support (1.25L, Basic Support x5)
Average calories per adult: 2385 + ale
Family of 6: Head of house 68d, Wife 68d, Relative 68d, 3 Youth at 32d each
Discretionary Spending (30d): 9d on manorial clothing, 21d in town

Notes on Discretionary Spending:
A "Hide" is my economic unit (see below).
A Hide consists of 4 families: 1 comfortable (good support), 2 average (average support), and 1 poor.
Each Hide spends 24d (0.1L) on manorial clothing and 60d (0.25L) in the nearby town.
If we say a Manor consists of 10 Hides, then peasants spend 240d (1L) on manorial clothing (supports manor production).
They also spend 600d (2.5L) in town, which could support 2 burgher families (at 1.25L each).


HORSES

Support for Horses

Pony: 0.5 acre meadow (6d), 1 acre pasture (6d), 1 acre oats (12d), other expenses (6d) = 30d/year (0.125L) + 10 days heavy labor for care
Rouncy or Sumpter: 1 acre meadow (12d), 2 acres pasture (12d), 2 acres oats (24d), other expenses (12d) = 60d/year (0.25L) + 20 days heavy labor for care
Poor Charger: 1 acre meadow (12d), 1.5 acres pasture (9d), 6 acres oats (72d), other expenses (15d + 12d) = 120d/year (0.5L) + 40 days heavy labor for care
Good Charger: 1 acre meadow (12d), 1 acre pasture (6d), 10 acres oats (120d), other expenses (18d + 24d) = 180d/year (0.75L) + 60 days heavy labor for care

Note: 1 acre of oats provides 1 pound per day in horse feed.
Other expenses include shoeing costs + extras for chargers (fancy tack, apples)


Horse Breeding and Training

Costs are based on a breeding mare with 3 foals (ages 1, 2, 3), which is a 2.5 horse equivalent.

Pony: 75d support, 20 days heavy for care (10d), 20 days specialized for training (15d), 10 year longevity, 120d value (20d profit)
Sumpter: 150d support, 40 days heavy for care (20d), 0 days specialized for training (0d), 10 year longevity, 180d value (10d profit)
Rouncy: 150d support, 40 days heavy for care (20d), 50 days specialized for training (40d), 10 year longevity, 240d value (30d profit)
Charger (poor or good): 150d support + 120d extra oats, 40 days heavy for care (20d), 250 days specialized traing (190d), 5 year longevity, 1200d value (720d profit)

Support includes maintaining breeding mare and foals with hay, pasture, oats, and horseshoes (and extra oats for charger training).
Care is time spent maintaining breeding mare and foals, while training is time spent preparing foals for riding or combat.

Details of breeding:
A mare produces 1 new foal per year. Of these, 10% will be chargers, 60% rouncies, and 30% sumpters.
Average production value with these percentages is 318d per mare per year.
Expenses include support and care (150d + 20d), training (42d, average of 55 days per horse), and extra oats (12d, 10% of horses trained), for total of 224d.
Thus, a mare with foals produces an annual profit of about 90d.
If all expenses are covered, a mare with foals produces 318d in horses per year, rounded down to 300d (1.25L).

Manor Herds
If a knight maintains 2 breeding mares with foals (5 horse equivalent), and covers all expenses, he will produce about 2.5L in horses per year.
Thus, every 5 years, he will produce 10 horses worth about 13L. Of these, 1 will be a charger, 6 will be rouncies, and 3 will be sumpters.
He keeps the charger, 2 rouncies, and 1 sumpter, to maintain his necessary array of horses.
He sells the remaining horses (about 1 per year) generating 1L in income (manorial industry).

I know my numbers for chargers do not match the official rules (1.25L for support and 20L value).
But as you can see, with good chargers we are at 10 acres of oats, 1 acre meadow, and 1 acre pasture (0.75L annual support).
I feel 12 acres is enough to devote to supporting a single horse.
As for charger value, 4-6L feels better to me than 20L, given the values and incomes in the game.
At 5L, we are at 4 times the annual support of a knight (just himself).


ECONOMIC UNIT - HIDE

My economic unit is the "Hide", which consists of 4 families (1 comfortable, 2 average, 1 poor) with 120 acres cleared land.
The Hide produces 6.75L in total production. Of that, 0.75L is spent on capital expenses (maintenance/repair, barrels, etc.).

That means the Hide produces 6L free and clear (1.5L per family on average).
Of this, 4L is kept by the farmers to support their families (1.25L x 1, 1L x 2, and 0.75L x 1).
The other 2L goes to rents (1L to the knight), tithes (0.5L to the church), and taxes (0.5L to the liege or king).
Thus, each Hide provide the knight with 1L in assized rents (10 Hides making up a standard 10L Manor).

When looked at as a whole (6.75L), 59% supports farmers (4L), 11% goes to expenses (0.75L), and 30% goes to rents/tithes/taxes (2L).

The Hide is 120 acres cleared "champion" land. Similar production for poorer land would require more acreage.
120 acres: 3 x 20-acre grain fields, 12 acres other crops, 34 acres pasture/meadow, and 14 acres waste (structures, roads, marsh).
The Hide would also include the "use" of 40 acres woods (for firewood and pannage for pigs).
But this woodland would not be counted as part of the acreage of the Hide, as the farmers' rights to the woods are very limited.


HIDE PRODUCTION (see production per acre/animal at top of post)

Grain Fields (3 x 20-acres)
8 acres Barley (ale): 3840 gal ale + 3200 pds feed, Requires 64 days heavy labor + 192 days light (brew)
8 acres Barley (pottage): 3840 pds barley (pottage), Requires 64 days heavy labor
4 acres Oats: 1440 pds oats, Requires 32 days heavy labor
9 acres Wheat: 2160 pds wheat flour + 1800 pds feed, Requires 72 days heavy labor + Miller services
9 acres Rye: 3240 pds rye flour + 1800 pds feed, Requires 72 days heavy labor + Miller services
2 acres Wheat (unmixed): 480 pds wheat flour + 400 pds feed, Requires 16 days heavy labor + Miller services
20 acres Peas (fallow field): 3200 pds peas + 4000 pds feed, Requires 160 days heavy labor

Other Crops (12 acres)
1 acre Flax/Hemp: 120 square yards linen/canvas cloth, Requires 8 days heavy labor + 96 days light (weave)
1 acre Herbs: 64 pds dried herbs, Requires 8 days heavy labor + 12 days light (cure)
2 acres Vegetables: 3200 pds vegetables + 1200 pds feed, Requires 16 days heavy labor + 24 days light (tend)
4 acres Apples (cider): 480 gal cider + 2400 pds feed, Requires 32 days heavy labor + 96 days light (ferment)
4 acres Nut Trees: 480 pds tree nuts, Requires 32 days heavy labor

Meadow/Pasture (34 acres)
16 acres Meadow (winter hay): Requires 128 days heavy labor
18 acres pasture (grazing)

Waste (14 acres)

Livestock
4 Dogs: Fed from scraps of 3200 pds meat produced, Require 16 days light labor
4 Oxen: Produce 200 pds beef + 1 yards leather, Require 4 ac meadow, 8 ac pasture, 24 days heavy labor + 16 days light
4 Cows: Produce 600 pds cheese + 400 pds beef + 6 yards leather, Require 6 ac meadow, 2 ac pasture, 32 days heavy labor + 72 days light
40 Sheep: Produce 800 pds mutton + 600 pds cheese + 120 yards wool cloth, Require 4 ac meadow, 8 ac pasture, 80 day heavy labor + 160 days light
8 Pigs: Produce 1200 pds pork, Require 6400 pds feed, 48 days heavy labor + 48 days light
48 Chickens: Produce 3600 eggs + 1200 pds fowl, Require 7200 pds feed, 96 days heavy labor + 144 days light
4 Beehives: Produce 36 gallons honey, Require 120 acres land, 8 days heavy labor + 16 days light

Other Work
Firewood: Produce 15 cords firewood (1800 cubic feet), Requires 30 acres woods, 60 days heavy labor + 60 days light
Maintenance (maintain buildings, fences, roads): Requires 48 days heavy labor + 48 days light

Total Labor Requirement for Hide: 1100 days heavy labor + 1000 days light labor (requires 4 families to provide)


HIDE INCOME/EXPENSES/TAXES

Hide production can be broken down into 25 basic support units (0.25L x 25 = 6.25L) + 0.5L in extra goods (total of 6.75L).

Support for farmer families is 4L (16x basic support).
Capital expenses is 0.75L (3x basic support - mostly goes to craftsmen).
Rents/tithes/taxes is 2L (6x basic support + 0.5L in extra goods).

Note that not all of the ale needed for 25 support units is brewed.
Most of the portion going to rents/taxes/tithes (6x basic support) is left as barley (brewed when needed).
The ratio is 1:1 (one pound of barley is sufficient to brew 1 gallon of ale).

The totals for 25 basic support units (+0.5L in extra goods) is as follows:

Ale (180 gal/unit): 3840 gallons + 660 pds barley (no remainder)
Cider (18 gal/unit): 450 gallons (Extra 30 gallons: 5d)
Barley (120 pds/unit): 3000 pds barley (plus use of 660 pds above) (Extra 180 pds: 4.5d)
Mixed Flour (210 pds/unit): 5250 pds mixed flour (Extra 150 pds: 7.5d)
Wheat Flour (16 pds/unit): 400 pds wheat flour (Extra 80 pds: 5d)
Peas (125 pds/unit): 3125 pds peas (Extra 75 pds: 0.5d)
Vegetables (125 pds/unit): 3125 pds vegetables (Extra 75 pds: 0.5d)
Cheese (48 pds/unit): 1200 pds cheese (no remainder)
Beef (24 pds/unit): 600 pds beef (no remainder)
Mutton (30 pds/unit): 750 pds mutton (Extra 50 pds: 5d)
Pork (48 pds/unit): 1200 pds pork (no remainder)
Fowl (48 pds/unit): 1200 pds fowl (no remainder)
Eggs (135 eggs/unit): 3375 eggs (Extra 225 eggs: 3.5d)
Tree Nuts (19 pds/unit): 475 pds tree nuts (Extra 5 pds: 0.5d)
Honey (1 gal/unit): 25 gallons honey (Extra 11 gallons: 5.5d)
Herbs (2 pds/unit): 50 pds herbs (Extra 14 pds: 3.5d)
Linen/Canvas Cloth (3 yds/unit): 75 yards (Extra 45 yards: 15d)
Wool Cloth (3 yds/unit): 75 yards (Extra 45 yards: 30d)
Leather (0.25 yds/unit): 6.25 yards (Extra 3.75 yards: 15d)
Firewood (0.5 cord/unit): 12.5 cords (Extra 2.5 cords: 10d)
Hay (none needed for support units): 2 acres (24d)
Oats (none needed for support units): 4 acres (48d)

After carving out 25 units of basic support (0.25L each), we have 180d (0.75L) in left over goods.
Most of these are cloth/leather/honey (non-perishables) and hay/oats (feed for horses).

Of the 0.75L in left over goods, 60d (0.25L) is lost to spoilage and inefficiencies, while 120d (0.5L) goes toward rents/tithes/taxes.
Spoilage is the loss in value (of the 6x basic support) that occurs from transporting these goods to landholder, church, and liege.
Spoilage/inefficiency accounts for a 2.5L loss across a 10-Hide Manor.
The lady wife or steward recovers some of this through administrative oversight (recovers 1L, adding it manorial production).


HIDE EXPENSES - DETAILS

The 0.75L (180d) spent on capital expenses are as follows:
42d to Miller (20 acres wheat/rye + 1 acre barley)
42d to Blacksmith (maintenance and repair, new tools)
42d to Carpenter (maintenance and repair, new tools)
18d to Manorial Staff (other crafts such as rope, candles, leatherwork)
12d on 60 pds Salt (cures meat and hide not included in 25 support units)
24d on town goods

Expenses for a 10-Hide Manor:
420d to Miller (1.75L): 1L supports family, 0.25L in raw materials (mill maintenance), 0.5L profit
420d to Blacksmith (1.75L): 1L supports family, 0.5L in raw materials (iron), 0.25L profit
420d to Carpenter (1.75L): 1L supports family, 0.5L in raw materials (wood), 0.25L profit
180d to Manorial Staff (0.75L): Staff provides labor (already paid for), 0.25L in raw materials (hemp, leather, wax), 0.5L profit
240d on Town Goods (1L to local town economy)

This explains 3L of manorial production (6L minus the 3L used to support craftsmen families).
It also explains 1.5L of raw material expenditures.

Notes on Blacksmith and Carpenter Services:
Each Hide has 1200d (5L) in structures and tools that need repair/maintenance. These include: a large barn (480d),
4 cottages (120d each), 2 plows (36d each), 2 ox-carts (24d each), and numerous tools/pots/barrels/crates (180d).
The amount spent on blacksmith and carpenter services (84d) is about 7% of this value.

Notes on Craftsmen Support/Labor:
The 1L support for craftsmen families pays for the craftsman (0.75L) and an assistant (0.25L), who could be his wife.
The farmers pay for 300-360 days labor (1.25-1.5L labor) from each craftsman, out of 500 days available (with assistant).
Thus, craftsmen are only 2/3 employed by farmers, which leaves 1/3 of their time to support their knight.
This would include maintaining his manor house, barn, stable, and arms/armor.

MANOR BUDGET

Check new thread for details on how my system works with the Manor Budget.

This is some fascinating work, maybe Greg should incorporate this into a new supplemental called "The Book of the Peasant". I'm not sure who outside you and I would read it, but it sure would be interesting.

I myself can get endlessly caught up in the minutia of economic details, especially for food. It is a death spiral. I strongly suggest you break away before you hit the even horizon and are sucked in...

but it is a cool idea...

You can find some info actual diets especially from monasteries and noble households (in the later middle ages). Most stuff I have read suggests much higher caloric intakes (more like 300-5000 cal). Remember these people are doing a lot of phsyical work w/o central heating.

N

The caloric intake per person is based on two things:

1. Documents I have read stating that peasants consumed about 2000 calories per day, while nobles consumed about 4000 calories per day. I will have to look for the source if anybody's interested.

2. The model I created for how much food can be produced on a certain amount of land given the amount of labor available per peasant family.

The food available to the peasants is also limited by the split in production between labor, capital, and rents/tithes. My research shows that split to be about 55% labor (amount kept by the workers), 10% capital expenses (amount spent maintaining plows and equipment), and 35% rents/tithes (amount collected by landholders and the church).

It is my understanding that peasants live on the margin of having enough to eat. If that's true, I dont think 1900 calories food plus 400 calories ale is too far off. However, I am open to ideas if other sources suggest a higher caloric intake.

I will try to post my model for agrarian production soon.

Fantastic!

Commoners, especially villeins, did not eat that much meat, at least not on a regular basis. Their diet mostly consists of grains and vegetables (combined to make pottage) and fruits.

For an excellent essay on this see Ian Mortimer's THE TIME TRAVELER'S GUIDE TO MEDIEVAL ENGLAND, pp. 172–174.


Best,


T.

Far be it from me to discourage such passion into history and the game. :)

One problem that I can foresee, though... Since the Pendragon economics are very much abstracting the peasants, you have the men and women spending the same in maintenance, £0.25 per person. Now I don't want to devalue the women's work, which definitely was hard, too, but I would imagine that on average the men would actually need more calories, being, on average, bigger and doing more physically demanding labor (being bigger and stronger) -> burning more calories. So that might be a potential issue there, once you go down to the level of daily intake of calories.

My personal interest is mainly in the more macro economics, village/manor sizes and up from there, since that is where the Pendragon game-play actually happens. Even then, I am happy enough to have something that plays nice, rather than be a full historical SimVillage. There is a huge amount of variation between the manors and villages, too, so it is not really useful to spend a lot of time to come up with numbers that fit EVERYTHING. But some average numbers are nice, such as that it takes £10 manor to support a knight and his family and 3 foot soldiers without problems. The ~1/3rd for rents, tithes and all sounds about right, too.

Far be it from me to discourage such passion into history and the game. :)

One problem that I can foresee, though... Since the Pendragon economics are very much abstracting the peasants, you have the men and women spending the same in maintenance, £0.25 per person. Now I don't want to devalue the women's work, which definitely was hard, too, but I would imagine that on average the men would actually need more calories, being, on average, bigger and doing more physically demanding labor (being bigger and stronger) -> burning more calories. So that might be a potential issue there, once you go down to the level of daily intake of calories.


Anyone who says women don't need to eat as much as men has never been around a pregnant woman for extended periods of time. Without modern contraceptives, I imagine pregnancies would be a LOT more common. And even when they weren't pregnant, women weren't just sitting around on their thumbs. When you're living on the edge you really don't have time to fuss around over who does what, work needs doing and if that work doesn't get done you'll not make it through winter.

Anyone who says women don't need to eat as much as men has never been around a pregnant woman for extended periods of time. Without modern contraceptives, I imagine pregnancies would be a LOT more common. And even when they weren't pregnant, women weren't just sitting around on their thumbs. When you're living on the edge you really don't have time to fuss around over who does what, work needs doing and if that work doesn't get done you'll not make it through winter.


First trimester: No extra calories per day.
Second trimester: Extra 340 calories per day.
Third trimester: Extra 450 calories per day.

Sedentary women: 2000 calories per day.
Active women: 2400 calories per day.

Sedentary men: 2400 calories per day.
Active men: 3000 calories per day.

OK, I doubt that 'active' means 'back-breaking physical labor at the farm' nor do I think that the men's work is exactly as taxing as the women's (this can be a much bigger difference), but lets take that as our ballpark. We can see that even while at their third trimester, the women still use less calories than men, on average (albeit I admit, it is close enough, within 10%). We can furthermore assume that women are not pregnant ALL the time, breastfeeding was a pretty good birth control method, so maybe one baby per 2 years -> 1/4th of the time at 2nd or 3rd trimester -> 3/4th of the time spending less calories. However, that seems to be on the level of 80% -> £0.05 difference or so in maintenance, so it is not a HUGE deal, assuming, of course, that the farm work is 'active' rather than involving more than moving your own body around.

I am just pointing out that when you get to this level of detail, the simplifying assumptions that we use in BotE start to break down. For example, you'd have to take into account that in BotE, the £0.25 servant girls are UNMARRIED, and hence, wouldn't be getting pregnant without a scandal. They still get the exact same maintenance as the laborers. We don't care about that difference in BotE, since we are more interested in the whole household and what happens to the knight, and the decision was to use £0.25 steps rather than bother with anything finer grained than that (which is a decision I fully support, by the way).


Incidentally, if that 3000 calories is closer to the truth (and honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if it is even more if people are working hard, especially at cold weather which is a bigger deal than most people realize, like Nick said), then the peasants need to get more calories from that £0.2 of food. Which means more grains, which is what Taliesin said. Funny how that all works. :)

I agree that the caloric intake would be different between males and females. But I don't see a need to create distinctions at the 0.25L level. In my mind, the kitchen girls would spend more of their support on clothes and whatever pretty things they could afford, while the dog boys would spend more of their support on food and less on clothes. Of course, that may not be enough to make it up to 3000 calories per day, which would indicate that the poor 0.25L male servants are truly struggling more than anyone else in the "system".

As far as the family goes, I see the 1L as being divided between a husband at 0.25L, a wife at 0.25L, an adult relative (grandparent or aunt/uncle) at 0.25L, and 2 children at 0.25L (0.125L each). I suppose the husband might eat at closer to 0.3L, while the wife might eat at closer to 0.2L, but I don't see a need to try and figure out these differences.

The first post shows how 0.25L can support an adult male at a very basic level. That's good enough for me.

My understanding of demographics during the medieval ages was that the population could be divided into three groups:

Young (under 18 years old) being 40% of the population
Adult (18-50 years old) being 40% of the population
Old (51+ years old) being 20% of the population

My economic model is based on these percentages. The family of 5 consisting of 2 adults (father and mother), 1 older relative (grandparent, uncle, aunt), and 2 children. This is the basis for the 1L division between 0.25L to father, 0.25L to mother, 0.25L to older relative, and 0.25L to support the two children.

To determine production, we have to find out how many work days the family can perform per year.

I have divided labor into two types:
Heavy Labor (includes rigorous labor fit only for men and semi-skilled labor)
Light Labor (simpler and less rigorous labor that can be performed by men, women, elderly, and most children)

I have put the typical agricultural work year at 250 days labor per person. While household servants would work year round (300+ days per year), farmers would have down time at certain points during the year that would limit their ability to work more than 250 days (in my opinion).

Now we have to determine how much labor each demographic group provides.

The Young (40% of population) provide 1% of heavy labor and 4% of light labor
The Adults (40% of population) provide 20% of heavy labor (full-time man) and 20% of light labor (full-time woman)
The Old (20% of population) provide 1% of heavy labor and 4% of light labor, like the Young

This means 22% of people provide heavy labor and 28% of people provide light labor.

Five people have 1250 days potential labor available between them (5 x 250 days).

Thus, a family of 5 can provide up to 275 days heavy labor (1250 x 22%) and 350 days light labor (1250 x 28%).

I am going to assume that the family of 5 must devote 100 days light labor to domestic work (cooking, baking, cleaning). This amounts to 25 days per 0.25L of support.

Subtracting the 100 days domestic work from the 350 days light labor leaves 250 days light labor available.

Thus, the farm family of 5 has 275 days heavy labor and 250 days light labor to apply to agricultural pursuits.

A note on pay rates.

If we take 250 days as a standard work year for farmers, then day wage and annual support work out very nicely for farm workers. Basically, a 0.25d daily wage equates to a 0.25L annual support, as there is a 240:1 difference between the two.

As for the difference between day laborers and full time servants, full-time servants getting 0.25L per year would certainly be expected to work more than 250 days per year. This would put their daily wage lower than the day laborer, who would make their full 0.25L in 240 days of work. The difference, as I see it, is that the day laborer is required to provide their own housing, which could account for 20% of their earnings.

If a full time servant is required to work 300 days per year for their 0.25L, they would be making the equivalent of 0.2d per day. The day laborer who works 300 days per year at 0.25d per day would make 75d per year (15d more than the full time servant). If we say the day laborer has to spend 20% of their income (15d) on housing, then that puts their disposable income (food and clothes) at 60d just like the full time servant who's housing is provided by their employer (or lord).

As for farmers, I see the male farmer as being a semi-skilled worker who merits 0.5d per day (or 0.5L per year if employed full time). In other words, they are a cut above the unskilled or menial male laborer who earns only 0.25d per day (or 0.25L per year if full time). The farmer's wife, on the other hand, is considered a menial worker who merits only 0.25d per day (or 0.25L per year if full time), despite her skill at brewing ale, weaving cloth, and making cheese. This pay difference is probably as much to do with gender roles as anything else.

I see the 0.25L male laborer as the poorest of the poor. They require more food than the female servants making 0.25L, which means they would be struggling. I would think these male workers would be truly unskilled, of low intelligence, and limited ability. Some might suffer from physical deformities or mental handicaps that prevent them from achieving more in life.

Here's some thoughts on levels of support:

0.25L - unskilled male workers (dog boys, grooms, porters) or semi-skilled female workers (spinsters, ale wives, dairy maids)

0.5L - semi-skilled male workers (farmers, footmen, low quality cooks/clothiers/stablers) or skilled female workers (lady's maids)

0.75L - skilled male workers or specialists (squires, officers of foot, high quality cooks/clothiers/stablers, farm foremen such as bailiffs)

1L - craftsmen or minor professionals (blacksmiths, carpenters, masons, chaplains, clerks, stewards)

2L - master craftsmen or true professionals (armorers, engineers, physicians)

I see the 0.25L male laborer as the poorest of the poor. They require more food than the female servants making 0.25L, which means they would be struggling. I would think these male workers would be truly unskilled, of low intelligence, and limited ability. Some might suffer from physical deformities or mental handicaps that prevent them from achieving more in life.


I wouldn't go quite that far. I agree that they are the poorest or the working poor, but you'd still have the actual beggars, who would be the cripples and town fools. I see £0.25 male laborer as simply someone who hasn't a farm of his own and (usually) a younger man (late teens and twenties) who is still gaining experience and trying to find his place in life. He probably would eventually graduate to a foreman (a rather clear career path there, maybe even up to a bailiff) or his old man might die and leave him the family farm.

Also, while our economics doesn't take it into account, I think the 'reality behind the the system' would actually see the pay split more closely to £0.3 and £0.2 (as you suggested to the farm family) between laborers and housemaids (which probably reflects also the caloric burning of the heavy labor male and light labor female). In short, while the system doesn't make a distinction between the two wages, in reality, I would expect there to be a difference.



Here's some thoughts on levels of support:

0.25L - unskilled male workers (dog boys, grooms, porters) or semi-skilled female workers (spinsters, ale wives, dairy maids)

0.5L - semi-skilled male workers (farmers, footmen, low quality cooks/clothiers/stablers) or skilled female workers (lady's maids)

0.75L - skilled male workers or specialists (squires, officers of foot, high quality cooks/clothiers/stablers, farm foremen such as bailiffs)

1L - craftsmen or minor professionals (blacksmiths, carpenters, masons, chaplains, clerks, stewards)

2L - master craftsmen or true professionals (armorers, engineers, physicians)


I think we had (in BotE) brewerer (a full-time alewife) at £0.5 and stabler at £0.75. Armorer is at £1 still; Blacksmith is £0.75 as are wainwrights. So £0.75 is for craftsmen and £1 is for more specialized craftsmen and minor professionals, in BotE. Farriers are £1 since they are 'horse doctors', not just blacksmiths specializing on horseshoes.

I see the 0.25L male laborer as the poorest of the poor. They require more food than the female servants making 0.25L, which means they would be struggling. I would think these male workers would be truly unskilled, of low intelligence, and limited ability. Some might suffer from physical deformities or mental handicaps that prevent them from achieving more in life.


I wouldn't go quite that far. I agree that they are the poorest or the working poor, but you'd still have the actual beggars, who would be the cripples and town fools. I see £0.25 male laborer as simply someone who hasn't a farm of his own and (usually) a younger man (late teens and twenties) who is still gaining experience and trying to find his place in life. He probably would eventually graduate to a foreman (a rather clear career path there, maybe even up to a bailiff) or his old man might die and leave him the family farm.


I agree, in my campaign .25L/year is the gowing rate for Kerns, day laborers, and bandits. Not starving by any means, so long as yours is the only mouth that needs feeding. Sort of like modern fast food workers.

Thanks for input on the 0.25L male workers. Sounds good to me. I can see the good, strong, bright younger males taking these jobs to learn and then move up the chain. I guess I was thinking more of the middle aged guy who is still feeding the knight's dogs. I would assume those guys are just plain "limited", but maybe not. Maybe its just bad luck, lack of opportunity, or being from the wrong family/clan/ethnic group.

As for the pay scale, I like keeping the craftsmen at 1L, simply for the sake of keeping their family income at 1.25L (assuming their wife earns 0.25L doing something). That puts their family standard of living in line with the more well-off farm families earning 1.25L. If they only make 0.75L (and wife adds 0.25L), their standard of living is the same as the basic farmer (1L), which doesn't sound right to me.

Then again, the Bailiff only makes 0.75L, so his family would live at 1L too, just like the basic farmers, unless his wife managed to make more than 0.25L. I just don't know how many jobs would be available for commoner women at the manor level that paid 0.5L.

Thanks for input on the 0.25L male workers. Sounds good to me. I can see the good, strong, bright younger males taking these jobs to learn and then move up the chain. I guess I was thinking more of the middle aged guy who is still feeding the knight's dogs. I would assume those guys are just plain "limited", but maybe not. Maybe its just bad luck, lack of opportunity, or being from the wrong family/clan/ethnic group.


Yep. If being a basic laborer is the only game in village, then you will do it, even if you would be qualified for greater things. Lack of opportunity would be the key for me, although patronage (wrong/right family) might play a role, too. The ethnicity would come to play perhaps in some lands re-conquered from the Saxons in post-Badon, but the ethnicity in Cymric lands would be pretty homogeneous: most of the peasants would be related from a few generations back due to intermarriage between the families.



As for the pay scale, I like keeping the craftsmen at 1L, simply for the sake of keeping their family income at 1.25L (assuming their wife earns 0.25L doing something). That puts their family standard of living in line with the more well-off farm families earning 1.25L. If they only make 0.75L (and wife adds 0.25L), their standard of living is the same as the basic farmer (1L), which doesn't sound right to me.

Then again, the Bailiff only makes 0.75L, so his family would live at 1L too, just like the basic farmers, unless his wife managed to make more than 0.25L. I just don't know how many jobs would be available for commoner women at the manor level that paid 0.5L.


Couple of things:
1) In BotE, we tended to use the clothiers and housekeepers (£0.5) as wives to the blacksmiths and bailiffs and such. So their families would be a notch above the peasant norm at £1.25.
2) In BotE, once you get past the single manor size, you would also have a chief bailiff at £1. So his family would be at £1.5.

As to how such a coincidence would come to pass... Well, bailiffs and blacksmiths are older and wealthier men, so it would make sense that they'd get a pick of the women, perhaps with a bit of a pull on getting their wives elevated to the specialist positions. Or the said wives could simply be a bit older than the generic housemaids running around. Also, if they DO marry a younger woman of £0.25 salary, then they probably have a few years before the children start eating into the family's maintenance, too, which also gives her more time to qualify to a higher level. While those housemaids would be exiting the pool to become farmers' wives and be replaced by new young lasses.

Another thing to consider is that those craftsmen might be the second sons and such, who don't have to take care of their elderly parents, either. This, the household is smaller (with extra £0.25 to spend on better standard of living, even at £1 total), and if say a blacksmith marries a young lass, he probably dies much earlier than she does (unless childbirth takes her away) and thus leaves a reasonably young widow (a common situation) free to remarry again. A bailiff could probably keep working in the overseer capacity long past the normal farmer 'retirement age', long past his own parents have already shuffled off the mortal coil.

Incidentally, although I have to emphasize that BotE was never intended to model this in detail (and convenience and simplicity played a huge role), if you look at the Production in BotE and compare it with the Raw Materials and manorial household wages, you see that there is a ratio of 1:4 between the wages and total Production.

As a ballpark figure, if we use that 4:1 ratio to model the actual worth of the work the manorial household people are doing, you can see that the laborers would be 'producing' £1 each and the blacksmith £3. Clothiers £2 each.

Now, for a peasant family, if we ignore the children and old folks from the equation, and say that the man's field work is that 4:1 and a woman's light labor (ignoring the child-rearing and cooking and such, this is just the farming side of the equation) is 2:1, we'd get £1.5 'production' per a peasant household from their fields & pasture. Given that about one third of this should be going to rents, tithes and fees, it leaves the family with ~£1 to subsist on during the year, exactly the number we want to have.

Now, that 1:4 ratio might not be the best possible, but with some furious handwaving, it is in the correct ballpark. :P

Morien, your feedback is most appreciated.

It really helps to talk this stuff out and get a better picture of what might be happening at the lower levels of society.

Looking at the new Book of the Estate, it appears we have 3 female manorial servants at the 0.5L level: the Lady's Maid and 2 Clothiers.

Let's say one is the Cook's wife, one is the Bailiff's wife, and one is the Stabler's wife. That covers all of the 0.75L male servants (except the Squire, but he is an unmarried young noble).

This gives us 3 "specialist/craftsmen" households at 1.25L. Looks like problem solved.

If one of these specialist guys did have a younger 0.25L wife, perhaps, as you say, he would not be supporting an older relative or as many children. Makes sense to me.

So, maybe something like this:

0.25L - unskilled male laborers (grooms, porters) and semi-skilled female domestics (house maids, kitchen maids)
0.5L - semi-skilled male workers (farmers, footmen) and skilled female domestics (clothiers)
0.75L - skilled/specialist male workers (squire, bailiff, cook, stabler) and craftsmen (blacksmith, carpenter)
1L - minor professionals (armorer, weapon-smith, mason???)
2L - true professionals (engineer, physician)

Morien,

Let me make sure I understand your post about production.

Manorial industry produces 10L in clothes (solar) and horses (stable). It takes 2.5L in raw materials and 2.5L in labor (manorial staff not household staff) to make that 10L. Therefore, we have a 1:4 ratio between staff support costs and production (income). I got it.

On the farm, if the farmer is considered a 0.5L worker, and he produces at the 1:4 ratio, then his production should be 2L. If he is considered a 0.25L worker, then at the 1:4 ratio, his production would be 1L. His wife, as a 0.25L worker at the 1:2 ratio, would add 0.5L to this. So, the farm family is either at 2.5L production or 1.5L production, depending on how you see the male farmer's value in the system.

While I have not posted it yet, my economic model shows in detail how the single family farmer with 40 acres (30 acres cleared and 10 acres woods), produces a total of 2L in goods.

If we expand this to 5 families, then we are talking about 10L. Of this,
5.5L (55%) is used to support the farmers (allows 3 families at 1L and 2 families at 1.25L),
1L (10%) is used for capital expenses (tools, barrels, plow repair),
1L (10%) goes church tithes, and
2.5L (25%) goes to rents/taxes.

This matches the historical split of production during the 1300's (at least that's what my research shows).

So, for the basic farmer producing 2L:
He keeps 1L for his support.
He sees 0.1L go to the richer farmers (actually, they would have a little more land and he would have a little less).
He sees 0.2L go to capital expenses.
He sees another 0.2L go to the church.
He sees 0.5L go to rents/taxes.

This is very close to what you suggested, with a farm family producing 1.5L, keeping 1L for their support, and paying 0.5L in rents/tithes/taxes.

I still have some questions about manorial industry.

What is the justification for a 4:1 ratio of production to labor. Why not just double or triple? Is it realistic for it to be that high, or was it done to make the numbers work out cleanly.

Also, I recall the old Book of the Estate gave a breakdown for what the solar, stable, and smithy produced. Why is that missing from the new book?

So, for the basic farmer producing 2L:
He keeps 1L for his support.
He sees 0.1L go to the richer farmers (actually, they would have a little more land and he would have a little less).
He sees 0.2L go to capital expenses.
He sees another 0.2L go to the church.
He sees 0.5L go to rents/taxes.

This is very close to what you suggested, with a farm family producing 1.5L, keeping 1L for their support, and paying 0.5L in rents/tithes/taxes.


The only problem with the above is that with each household paying £0.5 in rents and the typical manor having £10 in rents -> 20 peasants per manor. This feels a bit low.

If you include that 10% investment into the general maintenance, you'll get that 2/3rds ratio (or close enough). Also, I would treat the basic farmer as a £0.25 worker. His advantage over the day laborer is that he owns his land and gets to keep the produce. The downside is that he has to pay taxes and tithes, but he is still bringing over double home over what a day-laborer gets (£0.25).



I still have some questions about manorial industry.


That's what I was afraid of. :P



What is the justification for a 4:1 ratio of production to labor. Why not just double or triple? Is it realistic for it to be that high, or was it done to make the numbers work out cleanly.


Take into account the raw materials, which costs the same as labor, and hence brings the true 'profit' to 2:1. And that is assuming you have markets for that produce (which, incidentally, £10 production = used by the £10 manor populace). If you were to produce more (by hiring more workers and buying more raw materials, you cannot sell all that locally anymore, which means using middlemen (since your neighbors are mostly self-sufficient, thank you very much), so you'd be selling it at 50% at best -> break even.

But yes, in the end, the cleanliness of the numbers was a huge draw, too. Breaking the numbers to 25% to raw materials, 25% to manorial servants and 50% household servants worked out nicely. (Although admittedly, it was originally 25% household servants and 50% manorial servants -> 2:1 ratio in production, 3:4 with raw materials, and I experimented with 1/3rd each, too. In the end, the system in BotE worked out most cleanly, IMHO.)



Also, I recall the old Book of the Estate gave a breakdown for what the solar, stable, and smithy produced. Why is that missing from the new book?


1) Abuse: Because your's truly bitched and whined and complained about the abuse possibilities. Iron was 10:1. Cloth was 6:1. Adding labor meant that you were still 'spinning silver' with the cloth, and iron was even worse (although constrained by the scarcity of the resource, and hence that ratio was not really used for much).

2) Messy: It messed the hell out of my beautiful economy system. :) Also, the math was incorrect in many cases: for example, the £10 Manor had £0.8 raw materials turning into £5.8 (which should have been £4.8 instead).

3) Simplicity: Do we really, really care? The BotE 'default' economy system didn't even touch the actual breakdown, but recommended using 1 knight + 3 foot soldiers per £10 and 2% Discretionary Funds, full stop. With the re-design, you didn't have to worry about the Servants nor Production anymore, and everything worked out nicely and scaled without problem from a single manor to hundred-manor honours.

4) Unbelievable (to me, anyway): So the Lady of the Manor spins and sews several libra's worth, while running the manor, too? How much better would a full-time commoner seamstress sew? -> back to Abuse. This was also the reason why we added some more clothiers.

I am not sure what you mean by the 10% maintenance. Are you saying I should add a "maintenance" category to my 2L farm (another 0.2L in expenses) so the 0.5L in rents/taxes goes down to 0.3L?

I guess that would come closer to your version of a 1.5L farm paying 0.5L in rents/taxes/tithes (I guess 0.2L would go to the church even though that's a little more than 10%, and 0.3L goes to the knight in rents/taxes).

If you did that, you would need 33 farm families to get a 10L manor (165 people). Under my original version, you would only need 20 farm families (100 people).

Both of these are still far lower than the 100 families (500 people) referenced in lordly domains. Do you see that as a problem?

I have a question about manor production. Does the 2.5L in raw materials come from the sale of 10L in clothing to the villagers and household staff?

Another question about the 2:1 profit on the solar. If we say the farmers are spending 0.2L on food and 0.05L on clothes per person, does this mean, if they purchase clothes from their knight, 0.0125L is in raw materials (valued at what they gave it to him for), 0.0125L is the labor cost (compensation) for the clothiers, and 0.025L is profit to the knight?

I am still trying to figure out how profits ought to work when it comes to craftsmen. Let's take clothes as an example. Based on manorial production, it looks like clothes are a 2:1 profit industry (1d in raw materials + 1d in labor = 2d in inputs -- which produce clothes that sell for 4d).

If so, what's to stop a clothier from setting up shop in a village and selling clothes, making back her labor (0.5L) plus a profit of 2x her labor (1L). Now we have a clothier who is living at 1.5L, when they should be living at 0.5L.

What's to stop the local blacksmith from doing the same thing, turning his income into 2.25L when it should be 0.75L.

I guess my question is: how should craftsmen be handled? Should clothiers and blacksmiths be selling their products at just enough to cover their labor (1d materials + 1d labor = sell to villagers for 2d), or should they be making a profit (1d materials + 1d labor = sell to villagers for 4d). If they can make these kinds of profits, then they will be living at a much higher standard of living than their customary support. That just doesn't make sense to me.

If this whole profit thing is a prerogative of the knight, then I would think the villagers would do everything in their power to avoid buying from him. In other words, the farmer's wife would be sewing most the family's clothes (even if it was shoddy work) and they wouldn't be buying much at all from the knight's clothiers. That would seriously curtail the knight's ability to bring in his 5L in profit from his 2.5L in raw materials and 2.5L in staff labor costs. And I don't think there are enough esquire-class servants and nobles on the manor to spend 10L per year on clothing.

I am not sure what you mean by the 10% maintenance. Are you saying I should add a "maintenance" category to my 2L farm (another 0.2L in expenses) so the 0.5L in rents/taxes goes down to 0.3L?


I meant in your expense breakdown: 55% food + 10% investment (keeping the farm in shape) = 65% spent on peasant household's maintenance = close to 2/3rds.



I guess that would come closer to your version of a 1.5L farm paying 0.5L in rents/taxes/tithes (I guess 0.2L would go to the church even though that's a little more than 10%, and 0.3L goes to the knight in rents/taxes).


Actually, in my preferred breakdown of 40 families per £10 manor, it is closer to 1/6th to the knight (£0.25 per family = £10), 1/10th to the Church (£0.15), 1/30th to Court Fees and such (£0.05), leaving peasants with £1 to live and £0.05 'spending money' which would cover those Geld payments if they are collected this year. You can ignore that spending money if you want, leaving the breakdown at £1.5 per peasant family, of which:
£1 feeds the family,
£0.25 goes to the knight,
£0.15 to the Church, and
£0.1 to higher-ups (courts, liberties, geld).



If you did that, you would need 33 farm families to get a 10L manor (165 people). Under my original version, you would only need 20 farm families (100 people).

Both of these are still far lower than the 100 families (500 people) referenced in lordly domains. Do you see that as a problem?


Yep. Lordly Domains & KAP 5.1 are wrong on this score. Unfortunately, Yours Truly argued strongly for keeping BotE consistent with LD & KAP 5.1 during the revision, but as other books are pushing the more historical demographics, I have come around to feel that it would have been better to bite the bullet at the time and just fix this thing, since the whole Your Army section in KAP 5.1 is wrong, too.

The actual number of households per manor varies depending where the income comes from, but as a ballpark average, 40 households works great for me. The argument is basically between 40 and 50, with everyone involved agreeing that 100 is right out.



I have a question about manor production. Does the 2.5L in raw materials come from the sale of 10L in clothing to the villagers and household staff?


What sale of clothing? Who is saying anything about the sale of clothing? :P The raw materials is a catch-all for everything that the manor might buy from outside, or parts of the harvest set aside for production (wool from the sheep, for instance). The clothing that the manor produces goes overwhelmingly to clothing the people living at the manor (see below). There is very little clothing that is actually sold outside, because:
1) there is little surplus to make it worth your while, and
2) most of the peasant households would be making their own clothes, too.
IMHO and all that.



Another question about the 2:1 profit on the solar. If we say the farmers are spending 0.2L on food and 0.05L on clothes per person, does this mean, if they purchase clothes from their knight, 0.0125L is in raw materials (valued at what they gave it to him for), 0.0125L is the labor cost (compensation) for the clothiers, and 0.025L is profit to the knight?


The profit is a bit misleading here. It is more akin to 'making the clothes we will wear in-house, which is cheaper than buying them from the merchant'.

So in the case of clothing, you'd take part of the harvest (wool, or trade some other production for wool) -> raw materials. You add labor from the clothiers, and hey presto, your household is able to wear clothes next year, too.

If we assume that the amount of clothing is roughly 20% of the upkeep, and the total upkeep of a knight's manor is £20, this gives £4 needed in clothing (actually, it would be a bit less since not all of that £20 goes to people, but bear with me). £4 needed in clothing would be £1 in labor (the two clothiers per manor) and £1 in raw materials (assuming the 4:1 rule of thumb). Works out well enough. If you switch to 25% of upkeep for clothing and take out the raw materials (£2.5) and horses & oxen (£3), it is still close enough (£3.625), especially as the higher-ups might be spending more proportionally for their finery & if a few peasants actually do trade food for clothing from the manor.

Again, it is not as if I set out to do a HarnManor on Pendragon where every stitch is counted, but to have something nice, neat, close enough, simple and scalable.

I guess this is where I am confused. Isn't the knight having to produce 10L worth of clothing to make his 10L manor have 20L available for spending (supporting servants, horses, and the like)? So, why is it being counted as 4L? If that was correct, he would have 14L available, not 20L.

I assume the stable is pretty much making just enough to maintain the knight's horses. So, most if not all of this 10L manor industry would be coming from clothing.

You say the peasants pretty much make their own clothes (I agree), so that means these 10L in clothes are being used/consumed by the manorial family and servants (about 24 people). If we say people spend 20% of their support on clothing, then the manorial household would need a support cost of 50L to justify spending 10L on clothes.

If so, what's to stop a clothier from setting up shop in a village and selling clothes, making back her labor (0.5L) plus a profit of 2x her labor (1L). Now we have a clothier who is living at 1.5L, when they should be living at 0.5L.

What's to stop the local blacksmith from doing the same thing, turning his income into 2.25L when it should be 0.75L.


Again, who is buying? The manor is self-sufficient, and most of the peasants, too. The reason why the manorial production is so efficient is because they are doing it for themselves: they have the markets for it. This would be my go-to excuse if ever a Player tried to abuse the Production.



I guess my question is: how should craftsmen be handled? Should clothiers and blacksmiths be selling their products at just enough to cover their labor (1d materials + 1d labor = sell to villagers for 2d), or should they be making a profit (1d materials + 1d labor = sell to villagers for 4d). If they can make these kinds of profits, then they will be living at a much higher standard of living than their customary support. That just doesn't make sense to me.

If this whole profit thing is a prerogative of the knight, then I would think the villagers would do everything in their power to avoid buying from him. In other words, the farmer's wife would be sewing most the family's clothes (even if it was shoddy work) and they wouldn't be buying much at all from the knight's clothiers. That would seriously curtail the knight's ability to bring in his 5L in profit from his 2.5L in raw materials and 2.5L in staff labor costs. And I don't think there are enough esquire-class servants and nobles on the manor to spend 10L per year on clothing.


Not £10, no. But £10 from Production isn't just from clothing.

We haven't really looked into the whole craftsman thing in detail. So for example, how much would they pay to the guild, the town, the Church and the King? Assuming it is the same around 1/3rd as what peasants pay for their harvest, this would lead to:
£0.75 upkeep
£0.75 raw materials
£0.75 payments
which would indicate that 3:1 ratio would work for them nicely.

Unfortunately, the 3:1 doesn't work as nicely when you are dividing £10 as 4:1 does. So another possibility would be to add another £0.75 to the above and lower their payments to 1/4th...
£0.75 upkeep
£0.75 raw materials
£0.75 payments
£0.75 support staff & middle-men (maybe £0.25 domestic, £0.25 administration and £0.25 transport)

Where the support staff allows the craftsman to focus on his work rather than doing everything else on the side, too. In the manorial economy, these would the bailiffs, laborers, domestics, cooks and so forth. And then it sorta kinda works, especially if you ignore the division to household and manorial staff. So in essence, this is the 50% labor, 25% materials and 25% profit -model, which is actually where I started from in the 50% manorial staff, 25% household staff, 25% raw materials originally. The two different staffs are already pretty well mixed up, since it depends a lot what they are up to at different times of the year and if the knight is out and how big is the estate, etc.

In our independent craftsman's case, we could have this kind of distribution:
£0.75 earned by the craftsman himself
£0.50 earned by the wife, who is not only doing the domestic side, but is also keeping the business organized
£0.25 for the carter/middle-man bringing in the raw materials

And of course, all of the above assumes that there are markets for the production. Guilds in towns regulated who and how many were allowed to practice the craft in the town, and I'd imagine that the Lord of the Manor would be quick to give an independent blacksmith a kick in the backside.

If the raw materials are from the harvest, then is the 2.5L in raw materials gained by the knight through some kind of hidden tax?
So he gets 10L in assized rents plus 2.5L in raw materials for a total of 12.5L.

This would mean he is using 2.5L materials plus 2.5L labor to produce 7.5L in products. Thus, 2/3 expenses, 1/3 profit for the knight.

As for manorial craftsmen,

MILLER:

The miller is supposed to take a portion of the flour he grinds. The mill itself belongs to the knight and the knight takes a profit from it.

In my model, I have the families grinding their own flour, which isn't accurate,
but I wanted to see if they could be self-sufficient before bringing the miller into the equation.
An acre of wheat/rye is valued at 16d. The ground flour is valued at 20d.
The family spends 12 days grinding (12 x 0.25d = 3d), adding 3d labor + 1d profit to the 16d (thus getting us to 20d).

In the real world, that 4d worth of flour would be kept by miller, and the family would take home 16d in flour.
Since the miller has a truly professional mill, it would not take him 12 days labor to grind that much flour.
He could probably do it in 2 days (at 0.75d per day), thus 1.5d in labor expenses (instead of the family's 3d labor).
That means the miller makes 1.5d in labor + 2.5d in profit (4d total) for each acre of wheat/rye he grinds into flour.

I'm not sure it really matters what is labor and what is profit with these guys, because they are doing the work themselves and keeping the proceeds.

If we say the manor has 30 families, with each family farm holding 5 acres wheat/rye, then he is making 4d x 150 = 600d (2.5L).

Now, if he is supported at 0.75L and his wife at 0.5L (for a family income of 1.25L), then we have 1.25L left over.

Of this 1.25L, lets say 0.25L is spent by the miller on maintaining his shop, and 1L goes to the knight as profit.

So, I guess you could say 1L of the knight's 10L in manorial industry comes from the miller.

BLACKSMITH and CARPENTER:

Let's say the knight has licensed a single blacksmith and carpenter to work in his village in exchange for the profit from their shops.

In my economic model, 10% of all production is used for capital expenses (maintaining/purchasing the plows, tools, barrels, barns, and so forth).

If we have 30 families producing 2L each in farm produce (60L total production), that means there is 6L to spend on capital expenses.

If we use similar numbers for the Miller, then the peasants will be spending (in flour, eggs, or whatever):

2.5L with the blacksmith. Blacksmith keeps 1.25L (0.75L for himself and 0.5L for his wife). 0.25L goes to expenses. 1L goes to knight as profit.

2.5L with the carpenter. Carpenter keeps 1.25L (0.75L for himself and 0.5L for his wife). 0.25L goes to expenses. 1L goes to the knight as profit.

This means the knight can make 2L of his 10L manorial industry, from the blacksmith and carpenter.

What happens to other 1L in capital expenses? Maybe it is spent paying a laborer family to keep the fences mended and roads clear.

From this, we can see how the knight could get 3L of his 10L manorial industry from the miller, blacksmith, and carpenter,
all of whom have monopolies on the work they provide to the peasants.

If the knight's household produces 4L in clothing, we are up to 7L (getting closer to the 10L).

Now, lets look at raw materials:

With the clothing, we are talking about 1L in raw materials to produce 4L in clothing (20% of manorial household support).

With the miller, there are no raw materials (the wheat/rye is brought in by the farmers).

With the blacksmith and carpenter, they would need raw materials to produce new things, although I would think most of their work would be repairs.
Lets say they need 0.5L each. That would mean the knight spends 0.5L in materials to make the 1L profit from each of them.

Now, we are up to 2L in raw materials providing 7L in manorial industry (4L from clothes, 1L from blacksmith, 1L from carpenter, 1L from miller).

Any idea what the other 0.5L in raw materials and 3L in manorial industry would come from?

Also, it looks like the 2.5L raw materials is coming out of the 10L in manorial industry. Thus, it isn't really a hidden tax.
The knight produces 10L in goods and has to pay 2.5L of the 10L for the materials to make the goods.
Then, he has to pay some other portion (I don't think it's exactly 2.5L) for the labor to make the goods.

Another thing to note is that, under this approach, the miller, blacksmith, and carpenter are not really manorial servants in the same way
as the clothiers (whose support is provided by the knight). Instead, support for the miller, blacksmith, and carpenter are provided
by the peasants' production (a portion of the flour for the miller, and a portion of the capital expense "account" for the blacksmith and carpenter).

The 10L manor staff does not include them in the costs, so I guess its not a problem.

Thus, manorial industry would look something like this:

Clothiers (2): 4L industry (1L raw materials, 1L labor, 2L profit)
Miller: 1L paid to knight as pure profit (no materials cost)
Blacksmith: 1L paid to knight as profit (0.5L of that spent in raw materials)
Carpenter: 1L paid to knight as profit (0.5L of that spent in raw materials)

Thus, we have 7L industry, with 2L of that spent on raw materials.

Maybe we can get the blacksmith and carpenter profits up some.

If the peasants spend 3L with the blacksmith and 3L with the carpenter (expending their whole capital expense account), then
3L with blacksmith. Blacksmith keeps 1.25L. 0.25L goes to expenses. 1.5L goes to knight (minus the 0.5L raw materials).
3L with carpenter. Carpenter keeps 1.25L. 0.25L goes to expenses. 1.5L goes to knight (minus the 0.5L raw materials).

Now we get the following:
Clothiers (2): 4L industry (1L raw materials, 1L labor, 2L profit)
Miller: 1L paid to knight as pure profit (no materials cost)
Blacksmith: 1.5L paid to knight as profit (0.5L of that spent in raw materials)
Carpenter: 1.5L paid to knight as profit (0.5L of that spent in raw materials)

Now, we have 8L in manorial industry, but still with 2L in raw materials.
We need something that fills in the remaining 2L industry and 0.5L raw materials.



Another thing to notice with this model:
With clothiers, knight spends 2L to make 4L
With miller, knight spends 0L to make 1L
With blacksmith and carpenter, knight spends 0.5L to make 1.5L

This puts the profit margin (from the knight's perspective) at 2:1 for clothiers and 3:1 for blacksmiths/carpenters.

Would I be right in assuming that all this talk about manor indutries is from book of the estate?

Well, the basic numbers for the 10L manor (which is its assized rents) and 10L manorial industry are from book of the estate.
But the book does not give us details on where this 10L manorial industry is coming from.
That's one of the things I am trying to figure out (among many other things in these posts).

Check top post for updated economic system.