The gender division of labour
The case of Tuscan smallholders
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 11494265 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Rebecca Jean Emigh (0000-0002-5978-1249, University of California, Los Angeles, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2000 |
| Volume | 15 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 117-137 |
| Publication date | 2000-05-01 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Continuity and Change (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0268-4160 • E-ISSN: 1469-218X |
| Publisher | Liverpool University Press (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1017/s0268416099003501 |
| OpenAlex | W2161270224 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 7 |
What explains the gender division of labour in preindustrial economies? Although men and women frequently do different types of labour in any given society, men's and women's tasks vary considerably across different societies. In some societies, women engaged in trade and agriculture (in parts of Africa, for example); though these were men's duties in others (in parts of Europe, for example). At the same time, European historians discovered that women often engaged in tasks, such as agricultural labour and commerce, that were often assumed to be the domain of men, again suggesting a wide variation in the gender division of labour. Understanding the division of labour in preindustrial economies is important, because these historical cases often serve as implicit or explicit referents for understanding how much – or how little – has changed in contemporary societies. A number of excellent works, such as those by Barbara Hanawalt and Martha Howell, have explored women's roles in the economy. However, often missing from treatments that focus on women's history is an analysis of the gender division of labour, that is, an explicit comparison of men's and women's activities. Undoubtedly, such a comparison is hampered by the difficulties of finding documentary sources that provide the appropriate type of evidence. This article takes up this task in a particular way, by examining single-person households, composed of either males or females in fifteenth-century rural Tuscany. This empirical evidence is useful for several reasons. First, from an analytical perspective, it makes it possible to compare explicitly the activities of men and women who are in an identical position, that is, living alone. Second, as I discuss below, the documentary record from this period makes it possible to provide the evidence for this comparison. Third, this evidence provides historical information on a relatively under-researched group, rural widows and widowers. For example, there is generally more information available for Florentine women than for female rural inhabitants. Furthermore, little research explicitly compares men's and women's tasks to examine the gender division of labour. Although Piccinni and Mazzi and Raveggi provide much information about women's duties and activities in rural Tuscany, their work does not directly address the gender division of labour. While the archival evidence presented below cannot explain the division of labour at all points in individuals' life courses, it does provide explicitly comparative information about men and women
Agriculture · Demographic economics · Division of labour · Economics · Fifteenth · Geography · Perspective (graphical · Political science · Sociology · Gender Studies · Historical Economic and Social Studies · History · Law
| Citations per year | 0.28 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2001 - 2020 (20) |
| Highly cited | No |