XPost: soc.history, soc.genealogy.britain   
   From: Molly@soft255.demon.co.uk   
      
   In message , Ian Goddard   
    writes   
   >On 29/09/17 10:56, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:   
   >> I had always naively assumed that this word had to do with clothing   
   >> (tailoring, if you like) rather than cloth, and was pronounced with a   
   >> long o, as in holier or hosiery. From this discussion, it's clear I've   
   >> been wrong about what it involved; I'm curious about the pronunciation -   
   >> was it more like cloth ear?   
   >   
   >Your initial assumption is correct.   
      
   But the remainder of the (very interesting) posting to which I was   
   replying _did_ seem to suggest that the clothiers it was telling us all   
   about were involved with the manufacture and trade of cloth, rather than   
   clothes.   
   >   
   >I have doubts about the original meaning of tailor which are almost the   
   >converse of your supposition about clothier.   
      
   Clothier _looks_ as if it _is at least related to cloth - as, of course,   
   does clothing and clothes.   
      
   I don't have an etymological dictionary to hand, but I _think_ tailor   
   derives from the French taille, figure (i. e. body). So someone who   
   makes things to fit the body.   
   >   
   >In the 1379 subsidy rolls Penistone township had 2 taylours by   
   >occupation in 12 households.  I don't think an extremely remote parish   
   >was that well dressed.  Although no other townships were quite so well   
      
   I agree, that seems unlikely. (I wonder if the alternative spelling   
   makes for a different etymology - though I can't think what word it   
   comes from if that is the case.)   
      
   >supplied it does appear as an occupation or an occupational surname*.   
   >The earliest reference to a clothier I've seen so far was in another   
   >Penistone township, Thurlstone, in 1558.  Were the taylors what we'd   
   >now call clothiers and does the term "merchant taylor" retain this   
   >meaning?   
      
   Last bit sounds plausible: "merchant" implies dealing in larger   
   quantities, and I can't imagine most places would have someone who dealt   
   in large quantities of clothing rather than cloth - mass-production of   
   clothing I think only really happened in the 20th century (and then in   
   factories rather than premises), except perhaps in the context of   
   uniforms.   
   >   
   >*Declaring an occupation raised the tax from 4d to 6d which makes me   
   >wonder how many of those occupational surnames reflect current   
   >occupations.   
   >   
   Interesting - I'd never heard about that before. Would that distinction   
   continue into what people said they were in census returns? (I don't   
   remember ever seeing any indication in any of the censuses I've seen of   
   a distinction between occupation and whatever non-occupation might be   
   called.)   
   --   
   G6JPG's mum   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)