56: Gender, Labor, and Economic Change 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.

Geoffrey Chaucer, The Canterbury Tales, General Prologue, c.1390
 
A worthy woman from beside Bath city
Was with us, somewhat deaf, which was a pity.
In making cloth she showed so great a bent
She bettered those of Ypres and of Ghent.

When we think about the economic landscape of early modern Europe, it's easy to focus on the grand narratives of international trade, the rise of banking, and the beginnings of industrialization. However, to truly understand the economic fabric of this period, we need to look closer at the everyday transactions and the people who made them happen. In this context, the role of women in the economy offers a fascinating glimpse into the complexities and contradictions of the time.

While men dominated the upper echelons of trade, women were far from absent in this economic sphere. Their participation ranged from small-scale retail to, in rare cases, significant international commerce.

Take, for instance, the remarkable story of Glückel of Hameln, a Jewish woman who carved out a successful career in the diamond and gold trade. Her autobiography depicts a savvy businesswoman traveling across Europe, from Holland to Hamburg, pursuing profitable deals. Glückel's story, while exceptional, hints at the potential for women's economic agency in this period.

However, the reality was far more modest for most women. They were typically found in marketplaces, manning stalls, or small shops, selling everything from food to clothing. These women played a crucial role in the distribution of goods, often supplementing their income with moneylending and pawnbroking. Their presence was so ubiquitous that women vendors outnumbered their male counterparts in some eastern European markets, like those in Poland.

The relationship between these women and the authorities was often fraught with tension. City officials kept a watchful eye on female vendors and were concerned with maintaining fair trade practices and preventing the sale of stolen goods. Yet, many women found ways to resist these regulations, manipulating prices, creating artificial scarcities, and selling door-to-door despite prohibitions.

The story of Anna Weyland, a persistent vendor in Strasbourg, exemplifies this cat-and-mouse game between authorities and market women. For three decades, Anna repeatedly defied local regulations, switching her wares from herring to candles when faced with bans and leveraging disputes between local authorities and guilds to justify her actions. Her tenacity in the face of threats and punishments speaks to the resilience of women in this economic sphere.

These market women were far from passive participants in the economy. They developed a strong sense of identity, often prioritizing their roles as vendors over their familial titles. They actively defended their interests, engaging in legal disputes over territory and reputation. Their influence extended beyond the marketplace, playing significant roles in social movements like the Protestant Reformation and the French Revolution.

As we delve deeper into the changing landscape of women's work in early modern Europe, from the family-based economies of the late medieval period to the proto-industrial era, we'll see how women like Glückl and Anna were part of a broader tapestry of female economic participation. Their stories challenge our preconceptions about women's roles in this period and invite us to reconsider the complexities of gender, work, and economic change in early modern Europe.

In medieval Europe, women's economic contributions were deeply intertwined with the family unit. The household was not just a place to live; it was the primary economic engine of society. Women played crucial roles in this family economy, often working alongside their husbands in farming, crafts, and trade. As Europe entered the early modern period, new economic structures and social ideologies began to reshape the landscape of women's work.

Let's examine the family economy that characterized much of late medieval Europe. There were generally three types of family economies coexisting during this time. First, there was subsistence or near-subsistence production, where families produced goods primarily for their use. While this didn't usually lead to high social or economic status, it provided autonomy and control over resources.

Second, and most relevant to our discussion, was market-oriented production. In this model, families produced goods and services for sale to others, either on direct commission or in anticipation of market demand. These families had control over their means of production and could exercise some influence in their markets. This type of family economy often provided opportunities for women to achieve high labor status.

The third type was wage labor, where family members worked for wages hired by others. Unlike the first two types, workers in this category did not control the means of production or have much say in market decisions.

To understand how women participated in high-status market production during the late Middle Ages, let's look at two northern European cities: Leiden and Cologne. In Leiden, the economy was dominated by wool cloth production. The city had an interesting structure where large drapers coexisted with small-scale producers. Instead of traditional guilds, Leiden had "crafts," which were quasi-governmental bodies with limited autonomy.

Women's access to high-status jobs in Leiden was limited and diminished over time, especially in trades organized as "crafts." However, women were likelier to hold high-status positions in less formally organized sectors, such as cloth finishing, linen-making, and cloth sales. Typically, women gained access to these high-status jobs through family connections, often as wives or widows of artisans.

Two main factors contributed to women's exclusion from high-status work in Leiden. First, the political nature of "crafts," which excluded women. Second, work rules and schedules that were incompatible with family life. Even in less organized sectors, business practices like frequent travel made it difficult for women to maintain high-status positions.

Moving on to Cologne, we see a slightly different picture. At first glance, Cologne offers more opportunities for women in high-status jobs, including membership in guilds and participation in long-distance trade. However, a closer look reveals that women's access to high-status work still depended heavily on the survival of the family economy.

Cologne's economy had two main components: long-distance trade and industrial production, which were changing. Women's participation in high-status jobs was primarily in sectors that preserved the family production unit and did not require political status. In craft production, women were most prominent in guilds like silk-making, where they were often wives or relatives of merchant capitalists.

Interestingly, these women's guilds were structured differently from traditional guilds, with men controlling political and administrative functions. Most other craft guilds in Cologne became more male-dominated, with women's roles increasingly restricted. In commerce, women's participation was also tied to family businesses, often as widows continuing their husbands' trades. However, women's involvement in trade was generally smaller than men's and did not typically include participation in political merchant organizations.

As we move into the early modern period, we see the rise of proto-industrialization, which significantly impacted women's work. Proto-industrialization refers to the phase of industrialization where production for distant markets was organized in the countryside, often alongside traditional peasant economies. This development brought both opportunities and challenges for women's labor participation.

The effects of proto-industrialization on women's work varied greatly depending on the region and industry. In some areas, it created new opportunities for women in domestic industries, particularly in textile production. Spinning, for example, became a crucial occupation for many rural women. However, these opportunities often came with limitations. The work was typically low-paid, labor-intensive, and considered unskilled despite the required skill.

In England, for instance, the gender division of labor during this period showed interesting patterns. Women participated in all major economic sectors, but the extent of gender division differed. Craftwork showed a sharp division, agriculture was more flexible, and commerce showed fewer gender differences. Contrary to common assumptions, housework and care took less time and were less family-centered than often portrayed. Both men and women shared these responsibilities to some extent.

Rural areas saw significant changes in women's work during this period. Women were primarily responsible for household-related duties such as caring for small animals, preparing dairy products, making bread, and weaving linen and wool. In agriculture, they worked alongside men during harvests, especially when using tools like sickles, and performed physically demanding but often undervalued tasks.

The introduction of new crops, such as turnips and root vegetables, and the growing specialization of agriculture created additional work for women, particularly in areas where men were often absent for long periods, such as fishing or whaling communities. Rural women also contributed significantly to the market economy, selling products like soap, cheese, and poultry in nearby towns to supplement their household income.

Some women worked as agricultural laborers but were generally paid less than men, with wages determined more by custom than the quality of work. Women's wages remained lower than men's even during economic shifts and periods of rising wages. Additionally, young women were often employed as domestic servants. In contrast, others found work in proto-industrial settings, such as silk production or mining, though these jobs were typically low-paying and labor-intensive.

In urban areas, the guild system heavily influenced women's work. Craft guilds were predominantly male-dominated organizations, reflecting the male life cycle from apprenticeship to mastery. Women, particularly wives, daughters, and maids, contributed significantly to guild shops, yet their roles were primarily defined by their familial connections to male guild masters.

While a master could employ his daughter in the workshop, she would not receive formal training or certification. Wives often managed sales, bookkeeping, and shop operations, especially during their husbands' absences, yet their involvement did not equate to formal recognition within the guild structure.

As guilds developed, the opportunities for women, especially widows, began to dwindle. Initially, widows could operate their deceased husbands' shops for years without formal restrictions. However, by the mid-fifteenth century, rules began limiting their ability to hire workers or maintain their shops, often leading to financial instability and dependency on public charity.

The timing of restrictions varied across different regions and crafts. For instance, while girls in England experienced some opportunities for apprenticeship into the 18th century, guilds began to exclude women from most trades. Authorities sometimes established separate guild-like organizations for women, yet these were often viewed as charitable rather than legitimate professions.

Despite these challenges, many women found work in the growing service sector. Domestic service became a predominant employment avenue, employing a significant percentage of women, particularly in urban areas. Many women engaged in domestic work aimed to earn dowries, while others remained in long-term positions with low wages.

Many women found jobs in hospitals, orphanages, and as independent practitioners like midwives and wet nurses. Initially, the Church managed these institutions, but from the sixteenth century onward, secular city governments took control, centralizing care in more extensive facilities.

Midwifery, in particular, was regarded as a higher-status profession for women. Midwives underwent apprenticeship training and had various responsibilities, including childbirth assistance and welfare tasks. They maintained a strong professional identity, often appearing in legal matters concerning childbirth.

However, the mid-seventeenth century saw the rise of male medical practitioners, who began to displace female midwives by portraying them as inept. This shift reflected a broader trend where women were systematically excluded from medical professions, as universities denied them access to formal training.

The rise of capitalism profoundly affected how women's work was perceived and valued. As the definition of work shifted to paid labor, many of women's traditional economic contributions, particularly unpaid domestic tasks, were increasingly seen as non-work. Even paid labor performed by women, such as taking in boarders or sewing, began to be seen as domestic or reproductive, in contrast to men's work, which was considered productive.

This redefinition was further influenced by Renaissance humanism, which prioritized education for men, leaving women out of many occupations that required formal training. Similarly, the Protestant Reformation emphasized the civic role of men as fathers and heads of households while limiting women's roles to mothers and housekeepers.

Legal systems increasingly restricted women's economic activities, particularly after marriage, as they often required a husband's consent for contracts and other transactions. Although single women and widows could conduct business, their legal standing was typically more limited than men’s. Authorities began to view independent women suspiciously, seeing them as "masterless" and a threat to social order, passing laws to control their mobility and work opportunities.

Despite these restrictions, women's work patterns in preindustrial Europe have been described as an "economy of makeshift" or expediency. Poor single women and widows often had to piece together multiple temporary work arrangements. Married women supplemented the family economy with extra products or services they could sell. Women had to be adaptable and change their work according to economic opportunities, but their socialization and training for the domestic sphere limited their access to high-status positions.

Historians are debating whether women were better off economically in the preindustrial era. Some argue that women's work was more valued in the family-based economy of preindustrial times, while others contend that agricultural society was actually more oppressive for women.

What's clear is that while the preindustrial family economy gave more dignity to women's work, it also restricted them to their designated sphere. The transition to industrial capitalism brought new challenges and opportunities, creating a complex reevaluation of women's economic roles and status.

Throughout this period of change, we can observe both continuity and transformation in women's work. A substantial portion of the population remained engaged in agriculture, where many traditional roles persisted. Even in urban settings, many jobs remained unchanged, especially in domestic service and public market sales.

Women's work often involved adjusting to family life cycles, leading to fluctuating job engagements based on personal circumstances. Throughout this period, women faced barriers to occupations requiring formal education or significant financial resources, which limited their access to lucrative roles such as physicians, merchants, and government officials.

By the nineteenth century, many women's economic activities were no longer recognized as economically significant, reinforcing the notion that women's work was merely supportive rather than productive. Despite these challenges, a considerable number of women participated in the labor market. In 1700, studies revealed that 72% of women in London engaged in paid work, predominantly in low-status positions.

This phenomenon was part of a broader "Industrious Revolution," where increased labor was driven by the desire to afford consumer goods. Women's labor, though often characterized as supportive, played a crucial role in this economic transformation, similar to the contributions of women and children in contemporary global markets.

As we reflect on the changing landscape of women's work in early modern Europe, we see a complex picture of adaptation, resistance, and transformation. The transition from medieval family economies to proto-industrial and early capitalist systems brought new opportunities and significant challenges for women's economic participation.

The story of women's work during this period is one of more than simple decline or progress. Instead, it reveals the intricate ways in which economic structures, social norms, and gender ideologies intersected to shape women's roles and opportunities. While some avenues for high-status work closed, others opened up. Women demonstrated remarkable resilience and adaptability in changing economic landscapes, often finding ways to contribute economically even when formal structures sought to limit their participation.

The legacy of this period continues to influence our understanding of gender and work today. Many of the debates about women's roles in the economy, the value of domestic labor, and the balance between work and family life have their roots in the transformations of the early modern period.

As we continue to grapple with gender equality issues in the workplace, it's valuable to look back at this pivotal historical period. It reminds us that the relationship between gender and work is not fixed but constantly negotiated and renegotiated in response to broader economic and social changes.

The story of women's work in early modern Europe is far from complete. During this period, there's still much to learn about women’s experiences in different regions, social classes, and economic sectors. Future research might explore women’s informal economic activities, the experiences of marginalized groups, or how women resisted and subverted the economic restrictions placed upon them.

Understanding this history can inform our current discussions about gender equality, the value of different types of work, and the structure of our economies. It reminds us that change is possible, even if it's often slow and uneven. As we face our own economic transformations in the 21st century, the resilience and adaptability demonstrated by women in early modern Europe can serve as both an inspiration and a call to continue working towards a more equitable economic future for all.

In the next episode, we will begin to explore the money market, the impact of the influx of American silver, and the price revolution of the 16th century.

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 and also consider liking the I Take History With My Coffee Facebook page.  Feedback and comments are welcome at itakehistory@gmail.com.  Or you can leave a review on Apple Podcasts or on 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.