[âIn earlier periods, the household had been the center of production, both for its own consumption and for local barter. Storekeepers, merchants, and laborers received much of their pay in produce or services. But as wage labor and a market economy spread, people demanded money in payment for goods or services. Diaries and letters of the time reflected the growing realization that household production and informal barter could no longer meet a familyâs needs. âThere is no way of living in this town without cash,â Abigail Lyman complained of Boston in 1797.
But there was as yet no way of living on cash alone. Household production was still essential for survival because few commodities could be bought ready to use. Even store-bought chickens needed to be plucked. Factory-made fabrics had to be cut and sewn. Most families had to make their own bread, and the flour they bought came with bugs, small stones, and other impurities that had to be picked out by hand. As a result, in the early stages of the cash economy most families still needed someone to specialize in household production while other family members devoted more hours to wage earning. Typically, that someone was the wife.
Traditionally, middle- and lower-class wives had combined their productive tasks with child rearing and cooking. But as wage-earning work and commerce moved out of the home into separate work sites, this became more difficult. Many women worked for wages prior to marriage, but it was very hard to combine all the heavy work involved in running a household with the hours required to hold a job outside the home. For some families it became a mark of economic success and social status to have the wife concentrate on homemaking. But even for low-income families, who typically needed more than one wage earner, it made economic sense for the wife to stay home once the children were old enough to take jobs. A full-time housewifeâs work at home could usually save a family more than she could earn in wages.
As the division between a husbandâs wage-earning activities and a wifeâs household activities grew, so too did the sense that men and women lived in different spheres, with the manâs sphere divorced from domesticity and the womanâs divorced from the âeconomy.â A historian of the German Enlightenment writes that in earlier centuries, when economic production was still centered in the household, âdomesticity was a virtue shared by males and females, a shorthand term for thrift, hard work, and order.â Advice books in the late seventeenth century still urged husbands as well as wives to practice domesticity. But âa century later, domesticity had tumbled out of the constellation of masculine virtues.â
At the same time, womenâs traditional tasksâgrowing food for the family table, tending animals, dairying, cooking, repairing household implements, and making clothesâthough no less burdensome, were no longer viewed as economic activities. In the older definition of housekeeping, womenâs labor was recognized as a vital contribution to the familyâs economic survival. Wives were regularly referred to as âhelps-meetâ and âyoke mates.â But as housekeeping became âhomemaking,â it came to be seen as an act of love rather than a contribution to survival.
âFor all its value within households, . . .â writes American historian Catherine Kelley, âwomenâs labor was radically undervalued in the world of cash transactions.â Homemakers, now cut off from the sphere of the cash economy, became more dependent on their husbands financially. Womenâs diaries in the early nineteenth century reflect a new self-doubt about the worth of their contributions to the household economy, even while recording their huge amounts of unpaid work tending livestock, carding wool, sewing clothes, churning butter, hauling wood, cooking, and putting up preserves.
While the new division of labor stripped many women of their identities as economic producers and family coproviders, it also freed them from the strict hierarchy that had governed the old household workplace, where the husband had been the âbossâ of his familyâs economic activities. These economic changes, interacting with Enlightenment ideology, shifted the basis of marriage from sharing tasks to sharing feelings. The older view that wives and husbands were work mates gave way to idea that they were soul mates.â]
stephanie coontz, from marriage, a history: from obedience to intimacy, or how love conquered marriage, 2005
