The nature of agriculture, indeed, does not admit of so many subdivisions of labour, nor of so complete a separate of one business from another, as manufactures. It is impossible to separate so entirely, the business of the grazier from that of the corn-farmer, as the trade of the carpenter is commonly separated from that of the smith. The spinner is almost always a distinct person from the weaver; [clearly Smith never went to Navajo lands] but the ploughman, the harrower, the sower of the seed, and the reaper of the corn, are often the same. The occasions for those different sorts of labour returning with the different seasons of the year, it is impossible that one man should be constantly employed in any one of them.
My favorite word from this…the harrower.
I don’t know if I agree entirely with Smith’s point here, but in any case, one of the most exciting movements in agriculture these days is a move away from specialization and toward organic farming of a variety of crops on small plots of land.
{ 2 comments… read them below or add one }
I don’t think I agree with what he wrote at all. I never lived a farming or ranching lifestyle, but from hearing stories from my grandparents who did, they had to do a little of everything. My grandfather, who was a “farmer,” had to be a little bit of a carpenter, a little bit of a blacksmith, a little bit of a mechanic, a little bit of a veterinarian, and a so on.
Todd, I think that’s exactly what Smith was saying–that the farmer can’t be as much of a specialist. I don’t know that Smith ever lived in the country, though; he may have had little acquaintance with the life of a farmer.