1 62 READINGS IN RURAL ECONOMICS 



find that the bushel of wheat then averaged about j\ d. (47 cents); 

 and at the present day perhaps 6s. ($1.50); barley, per bushel, 

 then, 6d. (35 cents), now, 4 s. 6d. ($1,124); fowls, then, ijd. 

 apiece (9 cents), now, 5s. ($1.25); geese, then, 3* d. (21 cents), 

 now, 9s. ($2.25); butter, then, \ d. (3 cents), now is. 6d. 

 (37A cents); wool, then, 3d. (18 cents), now, I2d. (25 cents). So 

 that while money wages are not quite three times as high, corn 

 is a little over three times as high and butter and poultry have 

 risen enormously ; wool, however, was then relatively dear, prob- 

 ably because of the great foreign demand. As to meat, it is hard 

 to make the comparison, because it was not quoted by the pound. 

 Professor Rogers 1 estimates it (p. 684) at \ d. a pound (less than 

 two cents); cows averaged about 8s. ($10.00), and sheep about 

 is. (75 cents); no doubt they were very small, as were perhaps 

 the fowls and geese. Of other articles, 1000 herrings cost 2s. 

 iod. (#2.124), I find them now quoted at ^3 ($15), eggs 

 cost 4d. for 10 dozen (5 for a cent); wine, 4d. a gallon 

 (25 cents) ; pepper, is. 6d. a pound ($1.12?,-) ; a shirt cost 5|d. 

 (35 cents) ; an axe, 8d. (50 cents) ; a hoe, 2^-d. (15 cents) ; and 

 a plow, is. (75 cents). 



Cloth, as might be expected from the price of wool, was dear ; 

 but then we must remember that most peasants kept their own 

 sheep, and made their own cloth. Coarse woolen cloth was quoted 

 at is. 2d. (87.V cents) a yard (apparently a yard and a half wide) ; 

 a pair of boy's shoes at 4d. (25 cents). 



From all these facts I think it is clear that the English laborer 

 of the fourteenth century, especially when we take into account 

 the various small perquisites that were attached to his semi-servile 

 condition, had a much greater command of the necessaries of 

 life than his modern representative. Clothing was dearer, but 

 bread was cheaper, and meat and all other necessary commodities 

 were very much cheaper, in proportion to his wages. And what 

 is true of the day laborer is true in a still higher degree of the 

 small farmer, for to him, a producer of wheat and wool, the high 

 price of these articles was a positive gain. 



1 Professor J. E. T. Rogers, " History of Agriculture and Prices." 



