Schleswig-Holstein Business and Occupations: Difference between revisions

Schleswig-Holstein Business and Occupations (view source)

Revision as of 12:27, 19 May 2011

2,599 bytes added , 19 May 2011

no edit summary

VisualWikitext

BellBS

3,911

edits

@@ Line 21: / Line 21: @@
 a "Brinksitzer" was the poorest among farmers. He cultivated the smallest parcel of land at the "Brink", his place being at the edge of the village. See [http://de.ikipedia.org/wiki/K%C3%B6tter http://de.ikipedia.org/wiki/K%C3%B6tter] and [http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brinksitzer http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brinksitzer]
-<br>
+&nbsp;
-<br>
+== '''The day laborer''' ==
+====== <br>Toward the end of the 17th century, around two million of Denmark’s population lived in the country as farmers, farmhands, servants and day laborers. This group of people belonged to the absolute lowest social class. The day laborer was distinctly separated from other workers. He worked in the city or in the country for a daily wage. He was not a member of a guild, had no craft or trade. He worked for others in the fields and in the city did odd jobs as he found them. Some day laborers were in possession of a house or some small piece of land which could not sustain them. They came like all other land owning farmers under the control of the manor lord because they owed him rent and other services. Most day laborers did not have property and therefore were quite independent and enjoyed some freedom, that is, part of their time was theirs. They were not part of the servitude that encumbered most of the land working population. Their work lasted for one day. Work in the city was more varied than it was in the country.  ======
+====== <br>A day laborer was not part of the social network in a village and had no access to the cooperative arrangements attainable to the establishment. He had to live and fare for himself and his family. If work was not available close by, the man had to search for it, sometimes had to move, the downside of this sort of job. The bad social conditions for these people lead to emigration en masse. Even when democracy was introduced in Denmark in 1849, the day laborer was still a part of the group without any rights. When the Danish government issued some social protection for servants, it did not phase those who claimed rights of disposal over their personal. Those providing service did not have a political voice. A contemporary observation was this: After a long hard winter, small farmers, farmhands, servants and day laborers started the so called spring starvation, which meant, they either went hungry or ate up the grain that was put aside for sowing. Land reforms gave back property to farmers, but often they had not the ability to support themselves or their workers. Masses of the non-landowning population found themselves begging or in poor houses. It took more than one hundred years before poverty was no longer an issue for large parts of the population. ======
+====== <br>Records for day laborers can be found in city records, Amtsrechungen (administrative records), manorial archives and Armensachen (poor people) in state or city archives.<br><br> ======
+====== <br> ======
 === Of “dishonest” professions  ===
-If a profession could lend itself to dishonesty, it was deemed as “unehrlich”. For instance, a tailor, a miller or a shoemaker could measure material, flour or leather incorrectly and therefore cheat the customer. This was the&nbsp;conventional &nbsp;view on "dishonest" professions.&nbsp; However, later research revealed that among the professions deemed dishonest were rarely truely dishonest people, i.e., thieves. The professions of miller and Abdecker, the worst&nbsp;of&nbsp;"dishonest" occupations&nbsp;(he was a man who disposed off dead animals and did the “dirty work” for the executioner, namely the disposal of a corps)&nbsp;were rather not respectable.&nbsp;Such a stand was taken in cities, not so much in the countryside.&nbsp;Looked at as “unehrlich” were even those who had contact with a person who had a job that was regarded as dishonest by society. Entire families (when a child married a person with an “unehrlich” occupation) and children and grandchildren of persons deemed “unehrlich” inherited this trait. Forthwith they were not allowed to practice trades other than those belonging to their society. If a Abdecker was prosperous, he let his own helpers do the work and thus eliminated the appearance of being “unehrlich”. “Unehrlichkeit” became a problem when “unehrliche” persons died and others had to touch their bodies and/or coffins. Over time the number of dishonest persons grew to such an extent that the authorities had to interfere and release laws to remove the mark of “Unehrlichkeit” from people. In 1731 such a privilege was given to grandchildren if their parents had worked for 30 years in honorable professions. The thought may have been good but in reality a dishonest person was not allowed to work honestly. Therefore, another law had to be issued proclaiming that simply touching a body or a coffin of a dishonest person did not automatically make one dishonest. Society only slowly got away from the notion of what was honest and what was not and in 1820, even the Abdecker could look at his profession as a job worth doing and find acceptance.
+====== If a profession could lend itself to dishonesty, it was deemed as “unehrlich”. For instance, a tailor, a miller or a shoemaker could measure material, flour or leather incorrectly and therefore cheat the customer. This was the&nbsp;conventional &nbsp;view on "dishonest" professions.&nbsp; However, later research revealed that among the professions deemed dishonest were rarely truely dishonest people, i.e., thieves. The professions of miller and Abdecker, the worst&nbsp;of&nbsp;"dishonest" occupations&nbsp;(he was a man who disposed off dead animals and did the “dirty work” for the executioner, namely the disposal of a corps)&nbsp;were rather not respectable.&nbsp;Such a stand was taken in cities, not so much in the countryside.&nbsp;Looked at as “unehrlich” were even those who had contact with a person who had a job that was regarded as dishonest by society. Entire families (when a child married a person with an “unehrlich” occupation) and children and grandchildren of persons deemed “unehrlich” inherited this trait. Forthwith they were not allowed to practice trades other than those belonging to their society. If a Abdecker was prosperous, he let his own helpers do the work and thus eliminated the appearance of being “unehrlich”. “Unehrlichkeit” became a problem when “unehrliche” persons died and others had to touch their bodies and/or coffins. Over time the number of dishonest persons grew to such an extent that the authorities had to interfere and release laws to remove the mark of “Unehrlichkeit” from people. In 1731 such a privilege was given to grandchildren if their parents had worked for 30 years in honorable professions. The thought may have been good but in reality a dishonest person was not allowed to work honestly. Therefore, another law had to be issued proclaiming that simply touching a body or a coffin of a dishonest person did not automatically make one dishonest. Society only slowly got away from the notion of what was honest and what was not and in 1820, even the Abdecker could look at his profession as a job worth doing and find acceptance.  ======
 Source: