Gender Composition and Household Labour Strategies in Pre-Famine Ireland

P ep in Gende Composi ion and Household Labou S a egies in P e-Famine I eland Jane G ay Depa men o Sociology and Na ional Ins i u e o Regional and Spa ial Analysis Na ional Uni e si y o I eland, Maynoo h Coun y Kilda e, I eland Tel: +353-1-708 3596 Email: jane.g [email protected] P ep in o a icle o be published in The His o y o he Family (2006) 11, 1: 1-18. h p://www.else ie .com/wps/ ind/jou naldesc ip ion.cws_home/620196/desc ip ion 1 Abs ac This pape examines he ela ionship be ween gende composi ion and u al household s a egies in Ca an, a coun y in no h-cen al I eland, du ing he i s hal o he 19 h cen u y. I show ha he a io o adul emales o males was highes in small a m households ha depended o hei su i al on in ensi ely deployed amily labou in ag icul u e, lax-cul i a ion and spinning. By con as , households wi hou land o wi h mic o-holdings elied on he income om men’s employmen as ag icul u al labou e s, supplemen ed by women’s wo k as spinne s. Mo e subs an ial landholde s employed men as ag icul u al labou e s. In bo h o he la e ca ego ies household labou s a egies cen ed on men’s ac i i ies, wi h women’s wo k ep esen ing an impo an supplemen , whe eas in he small- a m ca ego y household labou s a egies cen ed on a s a egic balance be ween men’s and women’s labou inpu . Amongs households engaged in linen wea ing he a io o women o men was lowe ac oss all landholding ca ego ies. Di e ences in gende composi ion esul ed om a complex in e play amongs household labou and inhe i ance s a egies in a changing socio-economic en i onmen . 2 In oduc ion Resea ch on Eu opean p o o-indus ializa ion has highligh ed he signi icance o women’s wo k and he gende di ision o labou o pa e ns o economic g ow h and de elopmen be o e and du ing he ansi ion o ac o y indus y. In his classic s a emen on he p o o-indus ial amily economy, Medick (1976, p. 311) w o e ha women’s labou o en p o ided he “ i al ma gin” o household subsis ence. Subsequen ly, Gullickson (1986) a gued ha di e ences in he gende composi ion o he u al indus ial labou o ce wi hin households accoun ed o a ia ions in he demo-economic consequences o p o o-indus ializa ion. Acco ding o G ay (1997, 2003, 2005), gende ed di e ences in he in e ac ion be ween household and ma ke help o explain di e en and une en pa e ns o de elopmen in p o o-indus ial egions. Golds one (1996) sugges ed ha di e ences in he ex en o which women we e a ailable o wo k ou side he household explain why, in con as o Eu ope, China ailed o de elop a ac o y-based sys em o ex ile p oduc ion un il he 20 h cen u y. In a compa ison o women’s wo k in h ee Eu opean ex ile manu ac u ing egions Maynes (2003, p. 63) concluded ha , “ he his o ically pa icula na u e and deg ee o labo ma ke pa icipa ion o Eu ope’s young women had impo an implica ions bo h o he p ocess o economic de elopmen in Eu ope and o he his o y o Eu opean age and gende ela ions.” The schola ship on p o o-indus ializa ion and gende has highligh ed he ex en o which women’s labou was simul aneously cen al o household p ospe i y and egional economic g ow h, and ma ginal inso a as women we e gene ally con ined o he mos labou -in ensi e and poo ly emune a ed manu ac u ing asks. Schola s ha e de eloped a numbe o explana ions o he exis ence o gende di isions o labou in p e-indus ial and ea ly indus ial households. These ha e 3 cen ed on he compa ibili y o di e en kinds o asks wi h women’s p ima y esponsibili y o childca e (Tilly and Sco 1978; P is e 1995), on he exclusion o women om o mal social ne wo ks go e ned by guild egula ions o hie a chies o skill (Qua ae 1985; Rose 1992; Ogil ie 2004), and on women’s household ‘ba gaining posi ions’ in changing local and global con ex s (G ay 2005). Bu we know ela i ely li le abou how indi idual u al indus ial households deployed women’s labou in o de o mee hei equi emen s, gi en he cons ain s and oppo uni ies p esen ed by gende di isions o labou . Did he signi icance and a ailabili y o women’s labou a y ac oss di e en kinds o households, and i so, how we e hese a ia ions linked o household s a egies? In a classic a icle on he I ish linen indus y, Collins (1982, p. 134) a gued ha , “ he expanding p ospe i y o domes ic p oduc ion depended…on he pa adoxical si ua ion o a lexible household membe ship wi hin he in lexibili y o he pa ame e s o p oduc ion.” Those in lexible pa ame e s included amily li e cycle s age and he gende di ision o labou be ween spinning (women’s wo k) and wea ing (men’s wo k), “pa icula ly as he a io o spinning o wea ing labou was no on a one o one basis” (Collins 1982, p. 133). In o de o mee a ying demands o men’s and women’s labou , linen manu ac u ing households employed i ine an spinne s, ela i es ou side he nuclea amily, jou neyman wea e s and se an s, in addi ion o hei adolescen sons and daugh e s who we e able o emain a home longe han would ha e been possible in he absence o u al indus y. This a icle expands on Collins’ wo k h ough a de ailed examina ion o he su i ing 1821 census eco ds om Ca an, a coun y in no h-cen al I eland ha o med pa o he ex ended lax spinning and linen-wea ing egion cen ed on Bel as in he no heas . My analysis shows ha households’ capaci y o exe cise lexibili y 4 in hei labou supply, and he p opo ions o male and emale labou a ailable o hem, a ied acco ding o he size o hei landholdings. On a e age, smallholde s who we e no engaged in wea ing had highe a ios o emale o male wo ke s han ei he landless households o mo e subs an ial a m households. I a gue ha , while his was pa ly because smallholde s did no command he esou ces o add o e ain male labou , i also ep esen ed a dis inc household economic s a egy cen ing on labou in ensi e ag icul u al p oduc ion and spinning. The analysis u he shows ha households engaged in wea ing had lowe a ios o emale o male wo ke s, i espec i e o landholding size. Almos no wea ing households could ha e p oduced su icien ya n o hei needs om wi hin hei own household esou ces. Women’s labou is mo e likely o ha e p o ided he i al ma gin o subsis ence in small a m households han in wea ing households. I sugges ha his has impo an implica ions o how we in e p e e idence on he demo-economic consequences o p o o- indus ializa ion in he I ish case. Like Collins, I assume ha bo h gende composi ion and he deploymen o women’s labou we e subjec o s a egic choices and adap a ions a he le el o indi idual households. A ecen special edi ion o his jou nal highligh ed he ui ulness, bu also he limi a ions o he ‘ amily s a egies’ concep . By ocusing on s a egies, “ he agency o his o ical ac o s migh be exagge a ed, and he ex en o which we can econs uc hese s a egies om he esul ing beha io o hose ac o s will ce ainly be exagge a ed” (Engelen, Kok and Paping 2004, p. 248). In pa icula , i is no meaning ul o ega d an obse ed beha iou as s a egic i he e we e no al e na i e op ions. In his a icle I y o a oid he mo e se ious me hodological haza ds associa ed wi h he household s a egies app oach by supplemen ing my da a wi h e idence om a ange o sou ces, and by linking he indings o ends ac oss 5 ime. Howe e , I would also like o sugges ha we can lea n a good deal abou household dynamics and hei ela ionship o long- e m pa e ns o social change by examining beha iou as hough i we e subjec o choice, e en i i did no always appea so o he ac o s hemsel es. The gende di ision o labou is o en ea ed as a phenomenon go e ned mo e by no ma i e han s a egic economic conside a ions (see e.g. P is e 1995, p. 139). In I eland, so long as linen manu ac u ing was ca ied on in ‘independen ’ households, men ne e eso ed o he compa a i ely labou in ensi e and poo ly emune a ed ask o spinning, and women a ely engaged in wea ing.1 This gende di ision o labou c ea ed imbalances in he labou supply wi hin households ha in u n c ea ed a egional di ision o labou be ween spinning and wea ing dis ic s, and s uc u ed he o e all de elopmen o he indus y in I eland (Collins 1982, G ay 1993, 1997, 2003). I b oke down once he ela ions o p oduc ion we e ans o med by he applica ion o capi al o he mechaniza ion o spinning. Bo h women and men engaged in wea ing mill-spun ya n pu ou by manu ac u e s (Collins 1997). I is impo an o emembe ha p o o-indus ial households could ha e adop ed a di e en app oach o he alloca ion o asks associa ed wi h linen manu ac u ing. In p inciple, hey could ha e alloca ed labou acco ding o o e all household equi emen s a he han by sex. Ins ead, hey esponded o he oppo uni ies p esen ed by he g owing demand o linen goods wi hin he pa ame e s o he ‘ adi ional’ di ision o labou ha made spinning women’s wo k. Howe e , ha women ook up wea ing a e he mechaniza ion o spinning shows ha his ‘algo i hm o e e yday li e’ (Van de Linden, quo ed in Engelen, Kok and Paping 2004, p. 249) was no impe ious o change when economic ci cums ances made i unsus ainable. Thus he concep o amily adap i e s a egies p o ides a use ul 6 amewo k o unde s anding a ia ions in he gende composi ion o u al households. Wi hin he pa ame e s o a di ision o labou ha con ined women o labou -in ensi e, ‘d udge ous’ asks, he signi icance o women’s wo k o he household economy a ied acco ding o landholding size. Coun y Ca an in 1821: Da a and S udy A ea The i s comp ehensi e census o I ish popula ion was ca ied ou in 1821. Un o una ely mos 19 h cen u y I ish census enume a o s’ schedules we e des oyed by i e in he ea ly 20 h cen u y. Howe e manusc ip copies o he o iginal 1821 schedules su i e o i een pa ishes in Coun y Ca an, and a e held in he Na ional A chi es o I eland (CEN 1821/1-15).2 This ep esen s he la ges clus e o su i ing schedules om 1821. I collec ed wo se s o da a om hese e u ns. The i s consis s o he popula ion o households whe e a leas one wea e was esiden . The second consis s o a sys ema ic sample wi h a andom s a o e e y i h household whe e no wea e was esiden . In he analysis ha ollows, da a om he popula ion o wea ing households a e gene ally ea ed sepa a ely om he sample o non-wea ing households. Howe e , whe e s a is ical in e ences a e made o he en i e popula ion o he s udy a ea (wea ing and non-wea ing households), he wea ing da a a e weigh ed by a mul iplie o 0.2. <Figu es 1 and 2 abou he e> Figu es 1 and 2 show he opog aphy o Coun y Ca an and he loca ion o pa ishes wi hin he s udy a ea. The coun y was inco po a ed o I eland’s g owing domes ic linen indus y in h ee wa es. Du ing he i s hal o he 18 h cen u y he g ow h o popula ion in he linen dis ic s a ound Bel as led o inc eased demand o ood, milch ca le and ya n, which in u n s imula ed imp o ed ag icul u al p oduc ion 7 and an inc ease in spinning o he ma ke h oughou sou h Uls e (C aw o d 1975, p.245). Wea ing was a i s con ined o P o es an se le s along he no he n bo de o Coun y Ca an, bu a e 1745 i sp ead h oughou he eligious and social hie a chy in esponse bo h o widesp ead c op ailu e and ca le losses, and o inc eased demand o I ish linens in B i ain and he Ame ican colonies. I ish linens we e exposed o sale by wea e s and small manu ac u e s h ough a ne wo k o ‘b own’ linen ma ke s, so-called because he linens we e unbleached. The e hey we e pu chased by d ape s who sold hem on o he bleache -me chan s ha domina ed he I ish linen ade by he second hal o he 18 h cen u y. In Ca an, he mos impo an ma ke o linens was a Coo ehill, in he eas o he coun y. The e was a seconda y ma ke a Killashand a, in he wes , wi h wo smalle ma ke s (A agh and Ballynagh) o i s sou h. The 1780s and 90s saw unp eceden ed inc eases in I ish linen expo s. Sales a Ca an’s linen ma ke s mo e han doubled in his pe iod (C aw o d 1994, p. 78), which also saw he beginning o a new wa e o ag icul u al comme cialisa ion in esponse o high wa ime p ices o co n (O’Neill 1984, pp. 72- 78). Linen sales in Ca an began o decline in he ea ly decades o he 19 h cen u y, al hough he numbe o wea e s a ending he ma ke s does no seem o ha e changed (see C aw o d 1988, p. 47). The e is some e idence ha he olume o ou pu inc eased again in he 1830s and 1840s (Collins 1982, p. 142). Ca an’s ma ke s accoun ed o abou 5% o he o al alue o linens sold a b own linen ma ke s in I eland in 1821. Un o una ely, he a ea co e ed by he su i ing census schedules does no include ei he o he main linen ma ke owns, bu i does include he mino ma ke o Ballynagh, and eigh o he i een pa ishes lie wi hin wen y kilome es o ei he Coo ehill o Killashand a. My sample implies a p opo ion o 8.6 pe cen o households engaged in wea ing wi hin he s udy a ea. 8 The p opo ion is 8.4 pe cen i he popula ion o wea ing households in he census manusc ip s is calcula ed agains he published o als om he ea ly 19 h cen u y. Jus o e 50 pe cen o all households had a leas one spinne esiden , bu his es ima e is un eliable as he p opo ion o spinne s in he popula ion is dependen on he p opo ion o women o whom an occupa ion was eco ded and his, in u n, a ied conside ably ac oss pa ishes wi hin he s udy a ea (see G ay 1999, 2005). Spinning was an e e yday pa o no mal household du ies o all women bu I will a gue, he impo ance o spinning o he amily economy a ied ac oss di e en kinds o households. Un o una ely we do no ha e da a on ya n sales in Ca an compa able o he da a on linen sales, bu obse a ions by con empo a ies indica e ha he coun y was a majo supplie o ya n om he beginning o he 18 h cen u y h ough he ea ly decades o he 19 h cen u y. Using econome ic models, McG ego (1992) showed ha domes ic indus y was associa ed wi h a educ ion o inequali y in he dis ibu ion o landholdings in I eland in he 1840s, wi hou ha ing any disce nible e ec on median landholding size. This is pa ly consis en wi h he model o he p o o-indus ial amily economy de eloped by Medick (1981a, pp. 48-49). The a ailabili y o income om u al indus y li ed he es ic ions on household o ma ion inhe en in he peasan economy, pe mi ing amilies o su i e on smalle landholdings. A he same ime he desi e o ensu e an adequa e basis o subsis ence mean ha u al indus ial p oduce s we e willing o pay exo bi an en s jus o main ain a g ip on he land. As a esul , p o o-indus ial egions we e o en cha ac e ized by he apid expansion o smallholde s (Medick 1981b, p. 83). In I eland co ie s in he icini y o majo linen ma ke s we e able o ou bid enan a me s o leases, leading o an o e all educ ion in landholding size (C aw o d 1975, p. 255).3 Elsewhe e, howe e , a me s e ained 9 ela ions – inc eased p oduc i i y simply led o inc eased en s – he I ish had no incen i e o pos pone ma iage.8 Thus Connell ep esen ed ea ly ma iage as an ‘in e io good’ (O’G ada 1994, p. 7) leading o he ex ao dina y g ow h in I ish popula ion ha occu ed om he middle o he18 h cen u y. Resea ch ca ied ou in he 1980s and 1990s showed ha a leas some aspec s o Connell’s a gumen a e clea ly w ong. Mos impo an ly, he e is li le e idence o suppo he hesis ha he I ish ma ied a an unusually young age (Guinnane 1997, p. 82). The e is also some e idence o an inc ease in a e age age a ma iage in he 1820s and 1830s (O’G ada 1994, pp. 69-74; O’Neill 1984, p. 181), sugges ing ha I ish nup iali y did in ac espond o changing economic ci cums ances. Some esea ch suppo ed he hypo hesis o a posi i e ela ionship be ween pa icipa ion in u al indus y and p opensi y o ma y bu he indings a e ambi alen om he pe spec i e o p o o-indus ializa ion heo y (see he discussions in K ied e, Medick and Schlumbohm 1997 and G ay 2005). In an analysis o agg ega e, coun y-le el da a om he 1841 census, Almquis (1979, p. 711) ound ha spinning was signi ican ly posi i ely associa ed wi h high young emale nup iali y. Howe e , he ound no associa ion be ween wea ing and young emale nup iali y, al hough wea ing was associa ed wi h young male nup iali y. Mo eo e , spinning and wea ing we e no signi ican ly posi i ely co ela ed, e lec ing he ex en o which la ge pa s o u al I eland we e inco po a ed o he linen indus y only h ough spinning. In a mo e sophis ica ed analysis o 1841 census da a a he smalle e i o ial le el o ba ony, Moky (1985, p. 55) ound ha co age indus y a ec ed male p opensi y o ma y, bu no ha o emales. Howe e , Moky measu ed ‘co age indus y’ as he p opo ion o u al men and women employed in ‘occupa ions minis e ing o 16 clo hing,’ hus obscu ing he di e en e ec s o spinning and wea ing sugges ed by Almquis ’s analysis. Un o una ely, he 1821 census did no collec di ec in o ma ion abou ma iage o ma i al s a us (o he han ela ionship o he head o household). Howe e , O’Neill’s (1984, pp. 177-186) analysis o da a om he su i ing 1841 manusc ip s o he pa ish o Killashand a (see Map 2) e ealed an a e age age a ma iage o be ween 25 and 26 yea s o men, and abou 22 yea s o women. These igu es a e low compa ed o es ima es o I eland as whole, and Guinnane (1997, p. 82) sugges ed his migh be explained by he a ailabili y o ea nings om ex ile p oduc ion in Killashand a. Un o una ely, O’Neill did no make sepa a e calcula ions o age a ma iage o wea e s o spinne s. He did, howe e , calcula e ha on a e age labou e s’ wi es ma ied somewha la e - a 22.3 yea s - han a me s’ wi es - 21.7 yea s. The opposi e was ue o hei husbands: on a e age labou e s we e 24.5 yea s old a i s ma iage, while a me s we e 26 yea s old. In O’Neill’s da a he younges mean ages a i s ma iage we e ound amongs hose a me s and hei wi es ha he de ined as ‘middling’ – holding om 13-25 I ish ac es.9 Husbands in his ca ego y ma ied a abou 25.6 yea s compa ed o 27.1 yea s amongs smalle a me s. Thei wi es’ ages a e aged 21.6 yea s compa ed o 23.8 yea s amongs smalle landholde s. While di ec compa ison canno be made wi h he 1821 da a, O’Neill’s indings do sugges ha he oppo uni y o ma iage declined as landholding size dec eased. They a e consis en wi h he image o a landholding sys em cha ac e ized by widesp ead subdi ision ha began o be esis ed as he minimum iable holding size app oached. Acco ding o he mid-cen u y pa liamen a y enqui y known as he De on Commission, eigh ac es was he minimum holding size equi ed o “suppo a amily in com o ” (quo ed in McG ego 17 1992, p. 480), and his co esponds ai ly well o he modal dis ibu ion o a m size in Coun y Ca an.10 Fo a me s who wished o a oid subdi iding hei land, aining hei sons o be wea e s o e ed an al e na i e way o p o iding hem wi h an inhe i ance. In 1821 i was obse ed o Raphoe, in Coun y Donegal, ha wen y yea s p e iously “I was usual… o he a ming heads o amilies o pu hei younge sons in o his employmen [wea ing], many o whom we e enabled by p ope economy and applica ion in a ew yea s o pu chase a ms, bu his p ac ice has been long discon inued” (quo ed in C aw o d 1994, p. 51). I is plausible ha a simila s a egy pe sis ed in Coun y Ca an, gi en i s close p oximi y o Uls e ’s co e wea ing zone. Amongs households in he s udy a ea wi h esiden adul sons, 12 pe cen had a leas one son engaged in wea ing on medium sized holdings, compa ed o 6 pe cen o landless households and 8 pe cen o households on smallholdings. Heads o household who we e wea e s we e a li le younge on a e age han ei he a me s o labou e s.11 Thus he medium-holding households in he Ca an s udy a ea may ha e had mo e adul sons esiden due o a s a egy o delaying o a oiding inhe i ance. Howe e , hey also had a highe demand o male labou , as indica ed by he g ea e p opo ion o such households wi h male se an s p esen . This can be a ibu ed o he sys em o spade husband y ha cha ac e ized ag icul u e h oughou mos o I eland be o e he Famine. The mos commonly cul i a ed c ops in Ca an we e oa s, ollowed by po a oes and lax. Acco ding o O’Neill (1984, p. 86), he p e ailing sys em o o a ion in he ea ly 19 h cen u y was wo c ops o po a oes, ollowed by lax o oa s, hen h ee c ops o oa s ollowed by g ass o po a oes. The con inuous c opping egime, whe e he land was ne e pu o g ass, was cha ac e is ic o small 18 a ms wi hou li es ock. Because ag icul u e was ca ied ou by spade husband y, illage in p e-Famine I eland c ea ed diseconomies o scale. Acco ding o McG ego (1992, p. 480), “The op imum size o holding ell wi h inc eases in illage in ensi y…As a m size ell, p oduc ion became mo e labo -in ensi e. Thus small a ms ended o subs i u e labo o capi al in p oduc ion and illage o li es ock p oduc s in ou pu s.” On a ms wi hou li es ock, conside able labou was expended in he collec ion o manu e – om he oads, was eland and seasho e. Da a om he 1841 census show ha he a e age numbe o ca le and pigs pe a m inc eased wi h a m size. Howe e , acco ding o calcula ions by O’Neill (1984, Table 2.8, p. 91), he p opo ion o land gi en o e o li es ock ollowed a cu ilinea pa e n, wi h ‘middling’ a ms ha ing lowe mean numbe s o animals pe ac e han ei he he smalles o la ges a ms. This implies bo h ha he amoun o land de o ed o ce eal illage was g ea e in he middle anges, and ha he demand o male labou was highes on hese a ms. E en allowing o he ac ha medium-sized a ms ended o ha e la ge numbe s o adul sons and male se an s esiden , hey could no ha e me hei male labou equi emen s om wi hin hei own households. Acco ding o Si Cha les Coo e, i ook “bu wel e men o dig an ac e in a day’s wo k” (quo ed in O’Neill 1984, p. 87). Fa me s in Coun y Ca an had wo p incipal op ions o adding o hei male labou supply a imes o heigh ened demand. Unde he co ie sys em hey could p o ide landless amilies wi h a co age and small plo o po a o cul i a ion, in exchange o labou on he land. Co - akes some imes also included access o g azing land o a cow, o land o he cul i a ion o lax. Manu ac u ing a me s some imes also employed wea e s unde he co ie sys em, a p ac ice amously desc ibed, ili ied and almos ce ainly exagge a ed in i s signi icance by Coo e (1802, p. 41). 12 19 An al e na i e means o adding male labou was p o ided by he kinship o communi y based coope a i e wo k- eam known as a “mei heal.” I seems likely ha smallholde s we e mo e likely o ely on he mei heal han mo e subs an ial a me s (Sla e and McDonough 1994, p. 88). In he Ca an s udy a ea, we ha e al eady seen ha hose pa ishes nea es o he majo linen ma ke s we e cha ac e ized by ela i ely e enly dis ibu ed smallholdings, and ewe landless households. The p opo ions o households headed by labou e s we e also smalle in hese pa ishes. I middling a m households we e mo e likely o e ain adul sons a home and o hi e male se an s in o de o con ibu e o he high labou demands associa ed wi h illage ag icul u e unde spade husband y, why did smallholde s s i e o hi e emale se an s and o e ain adul daugh e s a home? The mos plausible explana ion is ha he ela i e impo ance o emale labou o he household economy inc eased as landholding size app oached he “com o able minimum” desc ibed by he De on Commission. Women and child en we e mo e likely o ha e been esponsible o d udge ous asks such as he collec ion o manu e (McG ego 1992). In addi ion, he income om lax cul i a ion and spinning is likely o ha e inc eased in signi icance. Flax cul i a ion d ew on la ge quan i ies o emale labou (C aw o d 1991, G ay 2003), e en hough lax ended o be g own in ga den plo s o abou an eigh h o an ac e – ha is, a ely in quan i ies exceeding he spinning capaci y o indi idual households (Smy h 1988). A hu Young’s es ima es o he expense o an ac e o land unde lax, compiled a en loca ions ac oss he no he n linen coun ies (bu no , un o una ely, in Coun y Ca an), gi e an indica ion o he alloca ion o men’s and women’s labou in lax cul i a ion. Women and child en we e esponsible o emo ing s ones and weeds om he ields, and o pulling he lax when i was eady o ha es . I he seed was o be sa ed, men did so in a p ocess called ‘ ippling.’ 20 Men we e also esponsible o laying he lax in wa e o be ‘ e ed’ – li e ally o ed in o de o b eak up he ib es – and o aking i ou once ha p ocess was comple e. Women sp ead he lax on o g ass o d y ou . Men and women hen li ed he lax and ca ied i home (wi h he assis ance o a ho se and ca ) whe e i was o en subjec ed o u he d ying by a u i e. The lax ib es we e hen b oken up by ‘bee ling,’ and ‘scu ching.’ These p ocesses essen ially in ol ed bea ing he lax s alks o emo e he ou e laye s and o b eak he emaining ib es in o s ands. Flax could be b ough o a scu ch mill, bu in many places wo king g oups o women did he scu ching, in a p ac ice simila o he ‘mei heal’ desc ibed ea lie . Young’s es ima es imply a a io o be ween h ee and ou woman days o each man day equi ed in cul i a ing lax, om weeding and s oning h ough o bee ling and scu ching. A e scu ching he lax ib es we e s aigh ened by ‘hackling’ (a so o combing) in p epa a ion o spinning. Specialis male ‘ lax d esse s’ could be employed o do his, bu spinne s equen ly did he job hemsel es (see he discussion in G ay 2003).13 <Table 4 abou he e> Un o una ely he 1821 census does no p o ide e y eliable e idence on he p e alence o spinning in di e en households o pa ishes. Table 4 shows he ex en o which adul women we e iden i ied as spinne s by landholding ca ego y in he Ca an s udy a ea. In bo h non-a isan and wea ing households, he p opo ion o adul emales iden i ied as spinne s was g ea es amongs hose who we e landless, e en hough he mean numbe o adul emales was lowes in his g oup. In wea ing households, he highes mean numbe o spinne s was obse ed amongs hose wi h mid-sized holdings, in con as o non-a isan households whe e he numbe o adul emales iden i ied as spinne s did no inc ease g ea ly wi h landholding size. These indings ha e o be ea ed wi h g ea cau ion because he p opo ion o women o 21 whom an occupa ion was eco ded in he 1821 census manusc ip s, and he e o e he p opo ion iden i ied as spinne s, is highly skewed owa ds a clus e o pa ishes in he sou heas o he s udy a ea ha we e cha ac e ized by ela i ely high p opo ions o landless labou e s on poo quali y land (see he discussion in G ay 1999, 2005). A somewha di e en pic u e is p o ided by published da a om he 1841 census. The pe cen age o women ‘minis e ing o clo hing’ by pa ish in 1841 – a easonable p oxy o spinning - is nega i ely co ela ed wi h he p opo ion o landless households in 1821 (Spea man’s ho = -.768, p. < .000). I is posi i ely associa ed wi h he p opo ion o households wi h mid-sized landholdings (Spea man’s ho = .615, p. < .007) and also – albei mo e weakly - wi h he p opo ion o smallholding households (Spea man’s ho = .442, p. < .05). The e is a nega i e associa ion be ween spinning in 1841 and dis ance om he nea es linen ma ke amongs pa ishes wi hin he s udy a ea (Spea man’s ho = -.559, p. < .015). E en assuming ha he 1841 census eco ded women’s occupa ions mo e eliably han ha o 1821, agg ega e da a a he le el o pa ishes can ell us li le abou he ela i e impo ance o ea nings om spinning in di e en kinds o households. Mo eo e , by 1841, daily ea nings om hand spinning had hal ed due o compe i ion om he spinning mills. Fo landless households his loss o income compounded he dis ess caused by alling wages in he con ex o inc eased popula ion and declining ag icul u al p ices (see O’Neill 1984, especially 108-115). In his con ex i is in e es ing o no e ha labou e s’ daugh e s we e much less likely han a me s’ daugh e s o be eco ded as spinne s in he 1841 census manusc ip s o Killashand a (O’Neill 1984, pp. 148-149). In sum, census da a a bo h household and indi idual le el sugges ha , while spinning may ha e been an impo an sou ce o income o landless and labou ing households in 1821, by 1841 women in such households we e 22 much less likely o eco d spinning as an occupa ion in he con ex o apidly alling p ices. The e is li le e idence o a ia ion in he p opo ion o emale labou de o ed o spinning be ween smallholding and medium-holding households – i any hing women in he la e ca ego y seem o ha e been mo e likely o eco d spinning as an occupa ion. Howe e , spinning was mo e p e alen in pa ishes adjacen o he majo linen ma ke s cha ac e ized by a smallholding land pa e n and ew landless labou e s. The e idence p esen ed abo e is he e o e no inconsis en wi h he a gumen ha , in he con ex o labou -in ensi e ag icul u al p oduc ion and he oppo uni y o ea n addi ional income om spinning, he ela i e impo ance o women’s labou o he small- a m economy inc eased as landholding size dec eased wi hin he Ca an s udy a ea. Mo e subs an ial a me s sough o maximize male labou by e aining adul sons a home and by employing day labou e s and co ie s. Howe e , by hemsel es, he census eco ds p o ide only a pa ial unde s anding o he socio- economic en i onmen wi hin which he membe s o u al indus ial households s o e o make a li ing. In he ollowing sec ion, in o de o ob ain a iche pic u e o he poli ical economy o Coun y Ca an, da a om he 1821 census a e compa ed wi h he “S a is ical Memoi s” compiled by a my o ice s employed by he O dnance Su ey in 1835. Local case s udies: D umlumman, and D ung and La ah The e a e h ee pa ishes o which bo h census manusc ip s and s a is ical memoi s a e a ailable, namely D umlumman in he sou hwes e n pa o he coun y, and D ung and La ah in he eas (see Map 2). Because he la e wo pa ishes we e enume a ed oge he in he 1821 census (see no e 2) hey will be ea ed as one pa ish in his discussion. Lieu enan And ew Bea y compiled he memoi o D umlumman 23 ( ep oduced in Day and McWilliams 1998, pp. 12-18), while Lieu enan P. Taylo compiled he memoi s o bo h D ung (Day and McWilliams 1998, pp. 19-24) and La ah (Day and McWilliams 1998, pp. 39-46). A i s glance, he census da a sugges ha he pa ishes we e qui e simila in social s uc u e. The mean landholding size in 1821 was be ween 9 and 10 ac es, and jus ewe han 10 pe cen o households had esiden wea e s in each case. Howe e , in D umlumman, 47 pe cen o households held ei he no land o mic o holdings o less han 3 ac es, compa ed o 28 pe cen in D ung and La ah. Mo eo e , he S a is ical Memoi s make i clea ha small landholdings in D umlumman esul ed om he p ac ise o sub-le ing, whe eas in D ung and La ah hey esul ed om subdi ision. This di e ence was a leas pa ly due o D ung and La ah’s ela i e p oximi y o he long es ablished linen ma ke a Coo ehill, and ya n ma ke a Ca an own.14 I may also ha e been due o ina en i e es a e managemen in D umlumman. Acco ding o Bea y, “No gen leman possessing any p ope y in he pa ish esides in i , no do any o hei agen s. The agen s a e gene ally paid by a pe cen age on he en collec ed “ (Day and McWilliams 1998, p. 17). Unde hese ci cums ances landlo ds may ha e been less zealous abou emo ing “middlemen” a he expi a ion o leases (see no e 3).15 In D umlumman, a me s who paid hei en s wholly in money en ed holdings o be ween 10 and 20 ac es unde leases o li es. They suble po ions o land, om 3 o 5 ac es, o unde - enan s who paid hei en s pa ly in labou . Fa me s elied p incipally on spade husband y o cul i a e po a oes, oa s and some imes whea , bu ho se-d awn ploughs we e used by “ he be e desc ip ion o a me s.” The a me s bu ned limes one on hei own land o use as manu e. Oa s, ca le and pigs we e bough by jobbe s a local ai s and ma ke s who anspo ed 24 hem o he po o D ogheda whe e hey we e sold o expo o England. Bea y’s accoun sugges s ha li le milling was ca ied on wi hin he pa ish. Fo y- h ee pe cen o wea e s in D umlumman we e heads o households in 1821, mos o which had no land a ached. Mos o he emainde (nea ly 50%) we e employees o lodge s in a m households; jus 7 pe cen we e sons. This sugges s ha wea ing was mainly ca ied on unde he jou neyman sys em whe eby a me s pu ou ya n ei he o co ie s on hei land, o o boa de s in hei own houses. Such wea e s we e p obably also employed seasonally as ag icul u al labou e s. Acco ding o he S a is ical Memoi , “Wea ing coa se linens is p ac ised by he men in he summe ime, when hei a ming does no occupy all hei ime. The women a e employed in hand-spinning bu o la e yea s his [has] no gi en any ai emune a ion o labou ” (Day and McWilliams 1998, p. 16). Fo y- ou pe cen o women in D umlumman epo ed an occupa ion ‘minis e ing o clo hing’ in 1841. Cu iously, Bea y epo ed ha “The p oduce o he loom is consumed on he spo .” This may mean ha linens we e manu ac u ed o local consump ion only, bu i seems mo e likely ha hey we e pu chased by local jobbe s (see he discussion in C aw o d 1988, p. 50). The e idence sugges s ha he e mus ha e been a conside able o e -supply o ag icul u al labou e s in his pa ish in he 1830s, and indeed Bea y p o ides a i id desc ip ion o hei po e y: The ood o he poo e class consis s chie ly o po a oes and bu e milk. In win e hey a e seldom able o ge milk and hey subs i u e a d ink made o onions boiled in wa e . Some o hem asse ha hey a e in such po e y a imes ha hey a e unable o pu chase sal . This seems almos inc edible. 25 Acknowledgemen s The da a on which he analysis in his a icle is based we e o iginally collec ed wi h he assis ance o he Wood ow Wilson Founda ion Women’s S udies P og amme, he Economic and Social Resea ch Ins i u e o I eland, and an Indiana Uni e si y Sou h Bend Summe Facul y Fellowship. I would like o hank James Keenan o c ea ing he maps, which we e unded by an NUI Maynoo h Lib a y Publica ion G an . Lexing on Books gene ously ga e pe mission o ep oduce hem. 32 Endno es 1 Women a e mo e likely o ha e engaged occasionally in wea ing han men a e o ha e engaged in spinning. Acco ding o C aw o d (1991, p. 260) i is “p obable” ha women wo e du ing busy imes. McKe nan (1995) has shown ha e o s o encou age women o wea e using he ly shu le had some success in Coun y A magh in he con ex o male labou sho ages du ing he Napoleonic wa s. Ne e heless, he p eponde ance o e idence shows ha I ish women did no engage in linen wea ing o any signi ican ex en un il a e he mechaniza ion o spinning. 2 S ic ly speaking, hese eco ds co e six een ci il pa ishes. Howe e , in he 1821 census he pa ishes o D ung and La ah we e enume a ed as hough hey we e one, p obably because a small pa o La ah is su ounded by D ung (see Map 1). 3 Some landlo ds we e happy o acili a e subdi ision in his way, because hey belie ed ha o he wise he en al alue o hei es a es was acc uing o a me - middlemen, a he han hemsel es (see Coo e 1802). 4 Cunningham (1960) concluded ha he landholdings in he 1821 census manusc ip s o he pa ish o La ey we e eco ded in Cunningham ac es. Howe e , acco ding o O’Neill (1984, p. 91, Table 2.7), I ish ac es we e he s anda d measu e in Coun y Ca an. 5 This pa e n is consis en wi h O’Neill’s (1984, pp. 171-177) analysis o child/woman a ios in he su i ing 1841 census manusc ip s o he pa ish o Killashand a, in Coun y Ca an. He ound ha , a e he i s h ee yea s o ma iage, a ming women consis en ly had mo e child en unde age i e li ing in hei households han labou ing women. 33 6 He e, “inma e” e e s o a esiden no iden i ied ei he as kin o he head o household, o as a se an . I includes esiden s wi hou any iden i iable ela ionship o he household head. 7 In he pa ish o Kild umshe dan in 1835, male se an s ea ned be ween 4 and 6 pounds pe yea , and emale se an s be ween 2 and 4 pounds pe yea in addi ion o hei boa d and lodging (Day and McWilliams 1938, p. 37). 8 Howe e , in pa s o he p o ince o Uls e , including Coun y Ca an, enan s bene i ed om he cus oma y obse a ion o ‘ enan igh ,’ which pe mi ed hem o sell hei in e es in hei holdings o ano he enan , and he eby o ob ain a e u n om capi al in es men . 9 The e we e hus somewha la ge , on a e age, han he mid-sized landholdings in his s udy. 10 Tha is, abou 6 Cunningham ac es, o 5 I ish ac es, assuming ha he obse a ion e e ed o s a u e ac es. 11 The a e age age o heads o households who we e wea e s was 40.53, compa ed o 45.39 amongs a me s (95% C.I. 44.70-46.08) and 43.16 amongs labou e s (95% C.I. 42.11-44.21). 12 The e m ‘co ie ’ has been used gene ally by I ish his o ians o e e o hose co ie -labou e s who ob ained access o land in ull o pa exchange o labou , and o dis inguish hem om small enan a me s and day labou e s. Beames (1975) no ed ha he e m was used a he loosely amongs con empo a ies. In some pa s o he coun y ‘co ie ’ e e ed o any smallholde , and in o he s simply o somebody who li ed in a cabin, i espec i e o he size o hei holding o hei occupa ion. Con usingly, Beames iden i ies Ca an as one o he places whe e he e m ‘co ie ’ 34 was used in he la e sense, bu i is clea om Coo e’s accoun ha he was e e ing o he co ie -labou e sys em. 13 Young’s es ima es mus be ea ed wi h some cau ion, since hey did no include he labou cos s o ploughing and sowing, and because ew g owe s cul i a ed so much as an ac e. None heless, his es ima es a e o he same o de as hose Mendels (1981, pp. 134-135) p o ided o he cul i a ion o lax in Flande s. Young (1892, pp. 138-139) did speak o a wea e on he A ds peninsula in Eas Uls e who g ew he mo e usual ‘peck’s sowing.’ This man did no gi e a comple e b eakdown o labou cos s by gende , bu his accoun does imply a mo e e en dis ibu ion o male and emale labou , gi en ha he had his lax ippled (which inc eased he male labou inpu ), and b ough i o a mill o be scu ched (which dec eased he emale labou inpu ). I is no en i ely clea why I ish lax sowe s a ely sa ed hei seed, elying ins ead on impo ed laxseed om No h Ame ica. In he ine wea ing dis ic s a ound Bel as he lax s alks we e pulled be o e he seed had ipened in o de o p oduce ine ib es. Elsewhe e, acco ding o Gill (1925, p. 34), gi en he small scale o p oduc ion in I eland, and he eady a ailabili y o Ame ican laxseed, i may no ha e been wo h he g owe s’ while o se some o he s alks aside o d y be o e p ocessing hem o spinning coa se ya n. A Wa ings own, Coun y Down, Young (1892, p. 132) was in o med ha “Ve y ew sa e hei seed; bu his mo e han usual, owing o he impo om Ame ica alling o .” See also he discussion in Hood (2003). 14 A hei mid-poin , D ung and La ah a e 11 kilome es om Coo ehill. D umlumman is 19 kilome es om Killashand a a i s midpoin , al hough he sa elli e ma ke owns o A a and Ballynagh a e nea e . Howe e , hese linen ma ke s in he wes o he coun y we e less well es ablished han hose in he no h- 35 eas , and so he p ocesses associa ed wi h land subdi ision had had less ime o de elop. 15 I should be no ed, howe e , ha Bea y also e e ed o he ac i i ies o Lo d Fa nham, a amously imp o ing landlo d, in es ablishing a school and in con ibu ing o he cos o cons uc ing a m buildings, in pa s o he pa ish. 16 The egional concen a ion o he linen indus y a ound Bel as associa ed wi h he mechaniza ion o spinning led o an inc ease in emig a ion om he wes e n and sou he n coun ies o Uls e in he 1830s. See Collins 1982, esp. p. 140 and O’G ada 1994, p. 76. 17 The la e could be de e mined by a whole ange o ac o s, including he a ailabili y o was e land, ina en i e es a e managemen , o he p ac ise o holding land in common. 36 Re e ences Almquis , E ic L. 1979. “P e-Famine I eland and he heo y o Eu opean p o o- indus ialisa ion: e idence om he 1841 census.” Jou nal o Economic His o y 39: 699-718. Beames, Michael. 1975. “Co ie s and Conac e in P e-Famine I eland.” Jou nal o Peasan S udies 2, 3: 352-354. Cohen, Ma ilyn. 1990. “Peasan Di e en ia ion and P o o-Indus ialisa ion in he Uls e Coun yside: Tullylish 1690-1825.” Jou nal o Peasan S udies 17: 413-432. Collins, B enda. 1982. “P o o-Indus ializa ion and P e-Famine Emig a ion.” Social His o y 7: 127-146. Connell, Kenne h H. 1950. The Popula ion o I eland, 1750-1845. Cla endon: Ox o d Uni e si y P ess. Coo e, Si Cha les. 1802. A S a is ical Su ey o he Coun y o Ca an. Dublin: The Dublin Socie y. C aw o d, Ma ga e . 1995. “Po e y and he Famine in Coun y Ca an.” Pp. 139-158 in Ca an: Essays on he His o y o an I ish Coun y, edi ed by Raymond Gillespie. Dublin: I ish Academic P ess. C aw o d, William H. 1994. The Handloom Wea e s and he Uls e Linen Indus y. Bel as : Uls e His o ical Founda ion. (Fi s published 1972 as Domes ic Indus y in I eland: The Expe ience o he Linen Indus y. Dublin: Gill and Macmillan). ______. 1991. “Women in he Domes ic Linen Indus y.” Pp. 256-264 in Women in Ea ly Mode n I eland, edi ed by Ma ga e McCu in and Ma y O’Dowd. Dublin: Wol hound P ess. 37 ______. 1988. “The E olu ion o he Linen T ade in Uls e Be o e Indus ializa ion.” I ish Economic and Social His o y 15: 32-53. ______. 1975. “Economy and Socie y in Sou h Uls e in he Eigh een h Cen u y.” Cloghe Reco d 8: 241-258. Day, Angelique and Pa ick McWilliams, eds. 1998. O dnance Su ey Memoi s o I eland, Volume 40. Coun ies o Sou h Uls e 1834-8. Ca an, Lei im, Lou h, Monaghan and Sligo. Bel as : Ins i u e o I ish S udies. De V ies, Jan. 1993. “Be ween pu chasing powe and he wo ld o goods: unde s anding he household economy in ea ly mode n Eu ope.” Pp. 85-132 in Consump ion and he Wo ld o Goods, edi ed by John B ewe and Roy Po e . London: Rou ledge. Engelen, Theo, Jan Kok and Richa d Paping. 2004. “The amily s a egies concep : An e alua ion o ou empi ical case s udies.” His o y o he Family 9: 239- 251. Gill, Con ad. 1925. The Rise o he I ish Linen Indus y. Ox o d: Ox o d Uni e si y P ess. Golds one, Jack. 1996. “Gende , Wo k, and Cul u e: Why he Indus ial Re olu ion Came Ea ly o England Bu La e o China.” Sociological Pe spec i es 39: 1- 21. G ay, Jane. 2005. Spinning he Th eads o Une en De elopmen : Gende and Indus ializa ion in I eland du ing he Long Eigh een h Cen u y. Lanham, Ma yland: Lexing on Books. ______. 2003. “The I ish, Sco ish and Flemish Linen Indus ies Du ing he Long Eigh een h Cen u y.” Pp. 159-186 in The Eu opean Linen Linen Indus y in 38 His o ical Pe spec i e. Pasold S udies in Tex ile His o y 13, edi ed by B enda Collins and Philip Olle enshaw. Ox o d: Ox o d Uni e si y P ess. ______. 1999. “Spinne s and Spinning in he Poli ical Economy o P e-Famine I eland: E idence om Coun y Ca an.” Pp. 161-184 in Reclaiming Gende : T ansg essi e Iden i ies in Mode n I eland, edi ed by Ma ilyn Cohen and Nancy J. Cu in. New Yo k: S . Ma in’s P ess. ______. 1997. “The I ish and Sco ish Linen Indus ies in he Eigh een h Cen u y: An Inco po a ed Compa ison.” Pp. 37-70 in The Wa p o Uls e ’s Pas : In e disciplina y Pe spec i es on he I ish Linen Indus y, 1700-1920, edi ed by Ma ilyn Cohen. New Yo k: S . Ma in’s P ess. ______. 1993. “Ru al Indus y and Une en De elopmen : The Signi icance o Gende in he I ish Linen Indus y.” Jou nal o Peasan S udies 20: 590-611. Guinnane, Timo hy. 1997. The Vanishing I ish: Households, Mig a ion and he Ru al Economy in I eland, 1850-1914. P ince on: P ince on Uni e si y P ess. Gullickson, Gay. 1986. Spinne s and Wea e s o Au ay. Camb idge: Camb idge Uni e si y P ess. Ha is, Ru h-Ann. 1994. The nea es place ha wasn’ I eland: ea ly nine een h- cen u y I ish labo mig a ion. (Ames, Iowa: Uni e si y o Iowa P ess.) House o Commons. 1843. Vol. 24. Repo o he Commissione s Appoin ed o Take he Census o I eland, o he Yea 1841. (Rep in ed in 1968, I ish Uni e si y P ess Se ies o B i ish Pa liamen a y Pape s. Popula ion 2. Shannon: I eland). McG ego , Pa . 1992. “The Labo Ma ke and he Dis ibu ion o Landholdings in P e-Famine I eland.” Explo a ions in Economic His o y 29: 477-493. 39 McKe nan, Anne. 1995. “Wa , Gende and Indus ial Inno a ion: Rec ui ing Women Wea e s in Ea ly Nine een h Cen u y I eland.” Jou nal o Social His o y 28: 109-124. Maynes, Ma y Jo. 2004. “Gende , Labo and Globaliza ion in His o ical Pe spec i e. Eu opean Spins e s in he In e na ional Tex ile Indus y, 1750-1900.” Jou nal o Women’s His o y 15:47-66. Medick, Hans. 1981a. “The p o o-indus ial amily economy.” Pp. 38-73 in Indus ializa ion be o e Indus ializa ion. Ru al Indus y in he Genesis o Capi alism by Pe e K ied e, Hans Medick and Ju gen Schlumbohm. T ansla ed by Bea e Schempp. Camb idge: Camb idge Uni e si y P ess. ______. 1981b. “The s uc u es and unc ion o popula ion-de elopmen unde he p o o-indus ial sys em.” Pp. 74-93 in Indus ializa ion be o e Indus ializa ion. Ru al Indus y in he Genesis o Capi alism by Pe e K ied e, Hans Medick and Ju gen Schlumbohm. T ansla ed by Bea e Schempp. Camb idge: Camb idge Uni e si y P ess. ______. 1976. “The p o o-indus ial amily economy: he s uc u al unc ions o household and amily du ing he ansi ion om peasan socie y o indus ial capi alism.” Social His o y 3: 291-315. Mendels, F anklin. 1981. Indus ializa ion and Popula ion P essu e in Eigh een h- Cen u y Flande s. Disse a ions in Eu opean Economic His o y. O iginally p esen ed as he au ho ’s hesis, Uni e si y o Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin, 1969. New Yo k: A no P ess. Moky , Joel. 1985. Why I eland S a ed: A Quan i a i e and Analy ical His o y o he I ish Economy, 1800-1850. London: Allen and Unwin. 40 Na ional A chi es o I eland. CEN 1821/1-15. Shel Numbe s 2/436/4-7. Copies o 1821 census enume a o s’ schedules, Coun y Ca an, a ious pa ishes. Ó’G áda, Co mac. 1994. I eland: A New Economic His o y, 1780-1939. Ox o d: Cla endon P ess. O’Neill, Ke in. 1984. Family and Fa m in P e-Famine I eland: The Pa ish o Killashand a. Madison: Uni e si y o Wisconsin P ess. Ogil ie, Sheilagh. 2004. “How Does Social Capi al A ec Women: Guilds and Communi ies in Ea ly Mode n Ge many.” Ame ican His o ical Re iew 109: 325-359. P is e , Ul ich. 1996. “A Gene al Model o P o o-Indus ial G ow h.” Pp. 73-92 in P o o-Indus ializa ion: Recen Resea ch and New Pe spec i es in Memo y o F anklin Mendels, edi ed by Rene Lebou e. Gene e: Lib ai ie D oz. ______. 1995. “The P o oindus ial Household Economy: Towa d a Fo mal Analysis.” Pp. 114-145 in The Eu opean Peasan Family and Socie y: His o ical S udies, edi ed by Richa d L. Rudolph. Li e pool: Li e pool Uni e si y P ess. Quae ae , Jean H. 1985. “The Shaping o Women’s Wo k in Manu ac u ing: Guilds, Households and he S a e in Cen al Eu ope, 1648-1870.” Ame ican His o ical Re iew 90: 1122-1149. Rose, Sonya. 1992. Limi ed Li elihoods: Gende and Class in Nine een h-Cen u y England. Be keley: Uni e si y o Cali o nia P ess. Schlumbohm, Ju gen. 1996. “P o o-indus ializa ion as a esea ch s a egy and a his o ical pe iod – a balance shee .” Pp. 12-22 in Eu opean p o o- indus ializa ion, edi ed by Sheilagh C. Ogil ie and Ma kus Ce man. Camb idge: Camb idge Uni e si y P ess. 41 Table 1. Ra io o Adul Females o Males in Non-A isan Households by Landholding Ca ego y and Family Li e Cycle S age Landholding Ca ego y Landless/Mic o Small Holding Medium Holding Family Li ecycle S age1 N % Sex Ra io N1 % Sex Ra io N % Sex Ra io 1.Beginning229 5.6 1.24 43 7.7 1.12 16 3.9 1.18 2.G owing 317 61.7 1.15*** 310 55.2 1.26 187 45.3 1.26 3.Ma u e 116 22.6 1.18 150 26.7 1.33 168 40.7 1.17* 4.Ad anced 34 6.6 1.21 52 9.3 1.32 37 9.0 0.89*** 5.Emp y Nes 18 3.5 N/A 6 1.1 N/A 5 1.2 N/A All S ages 514 100 1.16*** 562 100 1.27 413 100 1.19*** Di e ence om smallholde s * p. <.10; *** p. <.01. Mann-Whi ney Tes . 1. Family li ecycle s age could no be de e mined o one household 2. Beginning – Wi e less han 50 yea s, no child en; G owing – Child en less han 15 yea s only; Ma u e – Child en less han 15 yea s and 15 yea s o mo e; Ad anced – Child en 15 yea s o mo e only; Emp y nes – Wi e 50 yea s o mo e, no child en. Table 2. Non-a isan households in each landholding ca ego y, by p esence o di e en kinds o adul esiden s % Households wi h one o mo e adul (15+ yea s) Females Landholding Size N Daugh e s Se an s Rela i es Inma es Landless 514 18.9 2.7 5.9 7.8 Smallholding 562 25.3 12.5 6.2 6.0 Mid-holding 413 33.4 27.8 6.8 10.7 Males Landholding Size N Sons Se an s Rela i es Inma es Landless 514 20.6 1.8 2.1 3.5 Smallholding 562 25.5 4.8 2.0 2.5 Mid-Holding 413 40.4 23.2 4.6 6.8 Sou ce: Ca an Sample. Table 3. Wea ing households in each landholding ca ego y, by p esence o di e en kinds o adul esiden s % Households wi h one o mo e adul (15+ yea s) Females Landholding Ca ego y n Daugh e s Se an s Rela i es Inma es Landless/Mic o 366 15.8 4.9 4.9 9.3 Smallholding 282 29.4 14.2 8.1 7.1 Mid-holding 258 47.3 30.2 5.5 10.1 Males Landholding Ca ego y n Sons Se an s Rela i es Inma es Landless/Mic o 366 23.5 1.1 3.8 14.2 Smallholding 282 36.5 4.3 5.4 16.3 Mid-Holding 258 65.9 17.4 5.5 31.0 Sou ce: Ca an Sample Table 4. Spinning in each household by landholding ca ego y Mean pe household Landholding ca ego y N/n Households wi h one o mo e spinne s (%) Adul emales Spinne s Pe cen adul emales spinne s Non-a isan households (N) Landless/mic o 514 53.9 1.43**** 0.76 55.6* Smallholding 562 53.7 1.65 0.83 49.4 Mid-holding 413 54.5 2.02**** 0.94 46.4 Wea ing households (n) Landless/mic o 366 53.8 1.43 0.76 55.7 Smallholding 282 52.5 1.77 0.78 44.8 Mid-holding 258 64.7 2.25 1.27 54.3 Sou ce: Ca an Sample Di e ence om smallholde s * p. < .10; **** p. < .001. Mann-Whi ney es .