55: The Rise of Wage Labor in Early Modern Europe

I Take History With My Coffee Podcast
Episode 55
Title:  The Rise of Wage Labor in Early Modern Europe

Welcome back to the I Take History With My Coffee podcast where we explore history in the time it takes to drink a cup of coffee.

From The clothiers’ delight or The rich mens joy, and the poor mens sorrow
c. 1675

In former ages we used to give,
So that our Work-folks like Farmers did live;
But the times are altered, we will make them know,
All we can for to bring them all under our Bow:
We will make them to work hard for Six-pence a day,
Though a shilling they deserve if they had their just pay:
And this is a way for to fill up our purse,
Although we do get it with many a Curse.



The first printing press in Lyons was established in 1473. By 1539, the city had around 100 printing presses, employing a diverse workforce of journeymen, apprentices, and master printers. While master printers nominally owned their presses, they were heavily reliant on wealthy merchants or publishers who controlled the industry’s finances. These merchants often sat on the city’s governing councils, allowing them to dictate wages and working conditions, consolidating their power at the expense of workers. 

This economic imbalance triggered significant unrest among the printing workers, particularly journeymen and apprentices, who were increasingly exploited. Workers formed a semi-secret society that sought to protect their rights through collective action. They organized strikes, beat up strikebreakers, and protested wage cuts and longer working hours imposed by master printers eager to cut costs. The most notable of these strikes occurred in 1539 and again in 1572. Despite these efforts, their strikes were ultimately unsuccessful, largely due to the superior political and economic power of the merchant capitalists who controlled the city.

Though the printing workers in Lyons were unable to secure lasting improvements, their struggle was far from isolated. Similar labor unrest occurred in other printing centers like Paris, Venice, and Geneva, where workers fought against wage reductions, increased workloads, and the erosion of their autonomy. The unrest in the printing industry reflected a larger shift in labor relations across Europe, as more and more workers found themselves at the mercy of capitalists who controlled production and wages. The Lyons conflict offers a window into the broader changes that were transforming Europe’s labor markets, as independent artisans were increasingly replaced by wage laborers, marking the decline of the traditional craft economy.

The gradual transition from feudalism and a craft-based production system, where artisans owned their tools and sold products independently, to an economy defined by wage labor and capitalist enterprise reshaped the European labor market. 

The Black Death, which swept through Europe in the mid-14th century, had a profound and lasting impact on labor markets across the continent. The plague wiped out roughly a third of Europe’s population, creating a severe labor shortage that significantly altered the balance of power between landowners and workers. In the years following the Black Death, wages rose sharply as surviving workers found themselves in higher demand, and landowners were forced to offer better terms to attract labor. This shift in labor dynamics was particularly pronounced in Western Europe, where the traditional feudal system began to break down in the face of rising wages and declining rents.

For many landowners, the Black Death marked the beginning of a long period of economic decline, as the reduced population led to decreased demand for agricultural products and falling prices. In response, many landlords shifted from labor-intensive cereal production to less labor-intensive activities like sheep herding, which required more land but fewer workers. Others sought to increase their control over labor by reintroducing feudal obligations or passing laws to limit workers’ mobility and wages. These efforts were largely unsuccessful, as workers increasingly migrated from rural areas to towns and cities in search of higher wages and better opportunities.

The labor shortages caused by the Black Death also accelerated the transition to a wage-based labor system, particularly in urban areas. In towns and cities, where markets and industries were growing, the demand for labor outstripped supply, leading to the development of more formalized labor markets.
 
From the 13th century onward, labor markets emerged in European cities and towns. In Paris, places like the Place de Greve and Saint-Paul-des-Champs were central spots for hiring workers. Similar practices existed elsewhere, contracts for brickworkers in Lombardy rin 1288-1290 and records of wage-earners in the Portuguese countryside between 1253 and 1379. By 1393, vineyard workers in Burgundy, were meeting daily in the town squares to find work, marking one of the earliest labor markets. In Hamburg in 1480, day laborers gathered at Trostbrücke, and laborers in Avignon were known to stand on a bridge awaiting hire.

Hiring fairs, such as those held during Midsummer, Michaelmas, and other holidays, became common, particularly for farm laborers and servants. These fairs, which sometimes resembled a blend of slave markets and festivals, were key in regions like Normandy. Extra labor for harvests and other agricultural work came from these markets, representing a significant movement of people.

In both town and countryside, day-laborers were hired for various tasks like harvesting, cutting wood, or threshing grain. Paris had specialized labor for tasks such as hay transport, indicating a well-established system of temporary and permanent trades. The labor force mostly came from rural areas, but the development of the modern state also led to employment opportunities such as mercenary recruitment. Domestic servants were hired through agencies as early as the 14th century in Paris and Nuremberg. By the 17th century, labor markets had formalized, with specific streets in Paris dedicated to particular trades, making the hiring process more structured and organized.

By the 15th and 16th centuries, wage labor had become the dominant form of employment in many urban centers, laying the foundation for the more industrialized labor markets that would emerge in the centuries to come.

The putting-out system was a critical development in the transition from the medieval craft-based economy to an early form of industrial capitalism. This system emerged as a response to the growing demand for goods, particularly in the textile industry, and the limitations of the traditional guild system, which tightly controlled urban production. The putting-out system provided a flexible, decentralized mode of production that allowed merchants to bypass the guilds, take advantage of cheaper rural labor, and increase production on a larger scale. Its rise and expansion, particularly in the 15th and 16th centuries, significantly shaped the European labor market.

The putting-out system involved merchant capitalists supplying rural artisans with raw materials, such as wool, flax, or cotton, which the artisans would then process into finished or semi-finished goods in their homes. These artisans retained ownership of their tools but worked on materials provided by the merchant, who also controlled the marketing and sale of the final product. The workers were typically paid a piece rate for each item they produced, which incentivized efficiency while limiting the artisans' autonomy. 

The merchant played a central role in the putting-out system. By acting as a middleman, the merchant organized the entire production process, sourcing raw materials, distributing them to artisans, and collecting the finished goods for sale. The merchant avoided direct employment responsibilities and minimized the need for infrastructure or large-scale factories. This arrangement was advantageous to the merchant because it reduced costs, avoided the regulatory restrictions imposed by urban guilds, and allowed them to exploit a broader, more flexible labor force, especially in rural areas. This flexibility permitted merchants to meet the growing demand for products like textiles, which were becoming increasingly important in Europe’s expanding economy.

For rural artisans, the putting-out system represented both an opportunity and a limitation. On the one hand, it provided a steady source of income and access to broader markets. Many rural families engaged in cottage industries, producing goods during the agricultural off-season, especially in winter when farming activities were reduced. This extra income could supplement the household's earnings from agriculture. Additionally, family members, including women and children, could contribute to the production process because the work was done at home, making it a household-based form of labor. 

On the other hand, it tied artisans more closely to merchant capitalists, who controlled the flow of materials, set the terms of production, and reaped the majority of the profits. In many cases, the piece-rate wages they received were low, and artisans were often at the mercy of fluctuations in demand for their products. Over time, this system eroded the independence of rural workers, turning many of them into wage laborers dependent on merchant capitalists for their livelihoods. 

By the 16th century, the putting-out system had spread throughout much of Europe, particularly in regions where guilds were strong in urban centers. Merchant capitalists in Germany, France, and the Low Countries took advantage of rural areas to circumvent guild restrictions and access cheaper labor. The system also found success in industries beyond textiles, including metalworking, iron production, and paper-making. For example, in Venice, where the silk industry was highly developed, urban putting-out systems also evolved, combining craft and capitalist production methods within the city while outsourcing labor to surrounding rural areas.

While the textile industry and rural labor markets were undergoing significant changes, mining was another major sector driving the transition to wage labor. By the late 15th century, Central Europe’s mining industry, particularly in silver, iron, and copper, had become a critical part of the European economy. The increasing depth and complexity of mining operations required significant capital investment in equipment, drainage systems, and infrastructure. Wealthy merchants, eager to capitalize on the growing demand for metals, began to take control of the mines, transforming independent miners into wage laborers.

As merchants consolidated their control over mining operations, they introduced new organizational structures and labor hierarchies. Skilled miners became part of a formalized wage labor system, while unskilled workers were employed in lower-paying, more precarious positions. The term "Arbeiter" (worker) emerged during this period, reflecting the growing number of laborers who sold their labor for wages rather than working independently. The concentration of labor in mining towns led to the emergence of a proletariat, a class of wage laborers whose livelihood depended entirely on selling their labor.

The conditions for these workers were often harsh. Mining was dangerous, and wages were frequently low, particularly as merchant capitalists sought to maximize their profits. Workers in mining towns began to organize protests and strikes in response to exploitative conditions, similar to the labor unrest seen in Lyons’ printing industry. In some regions, mining workers formed early unions or guild-like organizations, seeking to improve their working conditions through collective action. Though often repressed, these protests were early examples of the growing awareness of class conflict that would characterize labor relations in the industrial era.

The transition to wage labor followed different trajectories in rural and urban areas, with distinct implications for the agrarian and urban workforces. In rural regions, particularly in Eastern Europe, the legacy of feudalism persisted well into the early modern period. Serfdom remained the dominant form of labor in much of the periphery, where large estates produced cash crops for export to Western Europe's more industrialized core regions. In contrast, Western Europe experienced a gradual decline in feudal obligations and a rise in wage labor, particularly in urban centers.

Guilds were powerful organizations that controlled trade, regulated production standards, and safeguarded their members' rights. At their height, they played a crucial role in ensuring that artisans retained control over their work, tools, and materials. They established rules for entry into the profession, regulated wages, and maintained quality standards, which provided a protective environment for their members. The guild system promoted a certain level of independence for artisans, as workers within guilds typically owned their tools and were considered independent producers, not wage laborers in the strict sense.

As the European economy transitioned towards capitalism and market-driven production, the power of guilds began to wane. The rise of the putting-out system and the increasing dominance of merchant capitalists undermined the guild system. As we already discussed, merchants began outsourcing production to rural artisans and small workshops beyond guild control, initiating the shift from independent artisanal production to wage labor. This move enabled merchants to exploit cheaper labor in rural areas, free from the restrictions of urban guilds. As a result, many artisans were forced to accept wage labor under the control of merchant capitalists, losing their independence in the process.

While the rise of merchant capitalism undermined the guild system, it did not disappear overnight. Many guilds adapted to the new economic realities, attempting to retain their relevance by integrating some elements of wage labor into their structures. For example, guild masters might employ journeymen and apprentices who were technically wage laborers but still operated within the guild’s regulatory framework. However, as more industries like textiles, printing, and metalworking expanded, these guilds faced increasing pressure. In many cases, journeymen organized themselves in response to declining wages and deteriorating working conditions, leading to strikes and protests like those seen in Lyons.

Guilds also attempted to resist the erosion of their power by opposing the influx of wage laborers and the shift toward capitalist forms of production. In Germany, for example, the “Zunftrevolution” represented a rebellion by guilds against merchant capitalists who were increasingly controlling the economy. This conflict often took the form of class struggles between guild members (artisans) and patricians (merchants), reflecting the broader tensions between the traditional craft system and the emerging capitalist economy.

The increasing dominance of merchant capitalists and the expansion of industries dependent on wage labor fundamentally changed the status of artisans. As more workers became wage laborers, they lost the autonomy they had under the guild system. Instead of controlling their tools and output, many artisans depended on employers for wages and materials. This shift was particularly evident in industries like printing, where master printers, who were once independent, became reliant on merchants for financing and materials.

In urban centers like Paris, Venice, and Geneva, where guilds had once held significant control, wage laborers began to outnumber independent artisans. The loss of autonomy was reflected in the labor unrest of the period, with artisans and wage laborers organizing strikes and protests to resist declining wages, longer hours, and worsening conditions. Yet, their efforts were often unsuccessful due to the merchant class's superior economic and political power, which had the support of municipal authorities.

As the transition to a wage-driven economy progressed, the guild system’s hierarchical structure contributed to the growing social stratification within the labor force. At the top were master artisans who controlled the means of production and employed journeymen and apprentices. These lower-ranking workers were increasingly treated as wage laborers rather than independent artisans, marking a shift in their social standing. Below the journeymen were unskilled day laborers, who were often paid inconsistently and faced greater economic instability.

This stratification reflected the broader changes occurring in labor markets, where wage laborers became the dominant group in urban economies. The decline of the guilds coincided with the rise of an urban proletariat, which, unlike the traditional guild members, had little control over their working conditions and wages. This new class of wage laborers often faced significant hardship, as urbanization and the concentration of labor in cities led to overcrowding, poverty, and labor discontent.

By the 16th century, guilds increasingly found themselves unable to compete with the new capitalist forms of production. Expanding industries like textiles, printing, and metalworking required large-scale, coordinated production efforts that guilds were ill-equipped to manage. The putting-out system allowed merchant capitalists to coordinate the production process across dispersed rural workshops, achieving economies of scale that guilds could not match. This shift towards more centralized, capitalist production models marked the beginning of the end for many traditional guilds.

In regions like Flanders and England, where capitalist production was more advanced, the role of guilds diminished more quickly. In contrast, in parts of Germany and France, guilds retained some influence for longer periods, although they increasingly functioned as mechanisms for controlling labor rather than empowering artisans. By the late 16th century, however, the separation of capital and labor had become increasingly dominant across Europe, signaling the rise of a wage-based labor system that would continue to evolve into the industrial era.

The contrast between rural and urban labor systems highlights the uneven nature of the transition to a market-driven labor force. While urban workers increasingly participated in wage labor markets, rural laborers in Eastern Europe and other peripheral regions remained subject to coercive labor systems like serfdom. This divergence was shaped by the broader dynamics of the European world economy, where core regions like Western Europe benefited from higher wages and more flexible labor markets, while the periphery remained tied to traditional forms of labor control.

The transformation of European labor markets during the 16th century cannot be understood in isolation. According to the world systems theory, the European economy was part of a larger global division of labor, with core regions like Western Europe as centers of industry and capital and peripheral regions like Eastern Europe and the Americas as providers of raw materials and labor. 

This global hierarchy had significant implications for European workers. In core regions, labor markets became more formalized, with growing wage labor, while peripheral areas remained dominated by coercive practices like slavery and serfdom. The rise of global trade and the influx of precious metals fueled economic growth and intensified competition and inequality.

The Lyons printing press conflict offers a lens into this broader transformation, as traditional craft systems gave way to capitalist enterprises, and workers became increasingly subject to market forces. This transition toward wage labor was uneven, with core regions moving faster than peripheries. Ultimately, this shift laid the groundwork for the industrial capitalism that would shape Europe for centuries to come.

In the next episode, we’ll explore the role of women in this emerging market-driven workforce.

As always, maps and other supporting resources for all episodes are listed in the episode description. In the meantime, for more historical content, please visit the “I Take History With My Coffee” blog at itakehistory.com. You can also find us on Facebook, Instagram, Threads, and our new YouTube channel.  Feedback and comments are welcome at itakehistory@gmail.com.  You can also leave a review on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.  You can also help support this podcast by buying me a coffee at buymeacoffee.com/itakehistory.  If you know anyone else who would enjoy this podcast, please let them know.  And thanks for listening.