Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-02T21:21:08.498Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Agriculture, Technology, and Industrialization: The Rural Textile Sector in the Netherlands, 1830–1860

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 October 2008

Joyce M. Mastboom
Joyce M. Mastboom
Affiliation:
Department of History, Cleveland State University, Cleveland, Ohio, USA.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In 1833 in a small village in the eastern Netherlands, a school opened for training weavers in using a new technology imported from England: the flying shuttle. The school began by training boys and girls between the ages of 11 and 16; when that proved successful it opened its doors to all weavers sent by manufacturers from the greater region, which soon necessitated several branch schools. By far the majority who came were home-based workers and after their training, a matter of a few weeks for those not new to the task, they could take a new loom with them on a payment plan. Once home, they in turn trained others, while local carpenters learned to build new looms. As a result, weaving in the rural textile regions of Twente and the Achterhoek (see figures 1 and 2) was transformed rapidly so that by 1836 no more new pupils came, and the schools were closed.

Type
Research Article
Information
Rural History , Volume 5 , Issue 1 , April 1994 , pp. 41 - 61
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1994

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. See Boot, J.A.P.G. and Blonk, A., Van Smiet- tot Snelspoel: De Opkomst. van de Twents-Gelderse Textieldindustrie in het Begin van de 19e Eeuw (Hengelo, Neth., 1957), pp. 123–5, 129.Google Scholar Although the school was open to both boys and girls, in the eastern Achterhoek (the area examined here) domestic weaving was traditionally a male occupation and I assume weavers to be men. Women helped a prepare raw materials (e.g. flax) and span but they did not usually weave.

2. Mendels, F.F., ‘Proto-Industrialization: The First Phase of the Industrialization Process’ in Journal of Economic History 32 (1972), p. 241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

3. See for instance Quataert, Jean H., ‘A New View of Industrialization: “Protoindustry” or the Role of Small-Scale, Labor-Intensive Manufacture in the Capitalist Environment’ in International Labor and Working-Class History 33 (1988), pp. 3–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar The literature on proto-industry has grown tremendously over the last ten years. For an overview and references see chapters 1 and 6 in Mastboom, Joyce M., ‘The Role of Eastern Gelderland in Dutch Economic Development, 1650–1850’ (Ph.D diss., Brandeis University, 1990)Google Scholar, the endnotes in Kriedte, P., Medick, H., and Schlumbohm, J., Industrialisation before Industrialization (Cambridge, 1981)Google Scholar, and Mendels, F.F., ‘Proto-industrialization: Theory and Reality. General Report’ in La Protoindustrialisation: Théorie et Réalité. Rapports., VIIIe Congress International d'Histoire Economique, Budapest, Section A2. (Université de Lille, 1982), pp. 69–107.Google Scholar A good bibliography can be found in Clarkson, L.A., Proto-Industrialization. The First Phase of Industrialization? (Basingstoke & London, 1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar which is very critical of the concept of proto-industrialization, but see also the more nuanced, although still critical, views expressed in Berg, M., Hudson, P., and Sonenscher, M., Manufacture in Town and Country before the Factory (Cambridge, 1983)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and Hudson, P., ‘The Regional Perspective’ in Regions and Industries: A Perspective on the Industrial Revolution in Britain (Cambridge, 1989).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

4. See Landes, David, The Unbound Prometheus (Cambridge, 1969), pp. 150–157.Google Scholar

5. See ibid., chapter 2, as well as Henderson, W.O., The State and the Industrial Revolution in Prussia (Liverpool, 1958)Google Scholar, and The Rise of German Industrial Power 1834–1914 (Berkeley, 1975), chapter 5.Google Scholar

6. Boot, J.A.P.G., De Twentsche Katoennijverheid 1830–1837 (Amsterdam, 1935), pp. 322–325Google Scholar. Mansvelt, W.M.F., Geschiedenis van de Nederlandsche Handel-Maatschappij, 2 vols. (Haarlem, Neth., 1924), 1:52.Google Scholar

7. Witlox, H., Schets van de Ontwikkeling van Welvaart en Bedrijvigheid in het Verenigd Koninkrijk der Nederlanden, 1815–1830 (Nijmegen, Neth., 1956), pp. 137–8, 140.Google Scholar

8. Boot, , Twentsche Katoennijverheid, pp. 326–8.Google Scholar

9. Mansvelt, , Nederlandsche Handel-Maatschappij, 1:65.Google Scholar

10. Dutch Trading Company.

11. Mansvelt, , Nederlandsche Handel-Maatschappij, 1:99.Google Scholar

12. Ibid., pp. 201, 223–4, 238–9, 203, 225. Boot, , Twentsche Katoennijverheid, p. 330.Google ScholarWitlox, , Schets van de Ontwikkeling, pp. 205–6.Google Scholar

13. Mansvelt, , Nederlandsche Handel-Maatschappij, 1:244–6.Google Scholar

14. Ibid., p. 259.

15. Boot, and Blonk, , Smiet- tot Snelspoel, pp. 83–5.Google Scholar

16. Mansvelt, , Nederlandsche Handel-Maatschappij, 1:262–6.Google Scholar

17. For a discussion of this view of technology, see Scranton, Philip, ‘None-Too-Porous Boundaries: Labor History and the History of Technology’ in Technology and Culture 29 (1988), pp. 722–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

18. For this and for what follows, see Mansvelt, , Nederlandsche Handel-Maatschappij, 1:266–9.Google Scholar

19. Quoted in English by Mansvelt, , Nederlandsche Handel-Maatschappij, 1:269.Google Scholar

20. Quoted by Mansvelt, , Nederlandsche Handel-Maatschappij, 1:272.Google Scholar

21. Mansvelt, , Nederlandsche Handel-Maatschappij, 1:280–1.Google ScholarPosthumus, N.W., ‘Bijdragen tot de Geschiedenis der Nederlandsche Grootindustrie (III)’, Economisch-Historisch Jaarboek 12 (1926), pp. 196, 200.Google ScholarBoot, and Blonk, , Smiet- tot Snelspoel, p. 125.Google Scholar

22. At first new looms cost Hfl.30 but later this went down to Hfl.12, compared to Hfl. 15 to Hfl.18 for old ones. See Boot, , Twentsche Katoennijverheid, p. 54, n. 4.Google Scholar

23. Boot, and Blonk, , Smiet- tot Snelspoel, pp. 123–4.Google Scholar

24. Algemeen Rijksarchief, The Hague (A.R.A.), Archief Nederlandsche Handel Maatschappij (N.H.M.), nr. 1995, ‘Rapport over eene reize door den directeur W. de Clercq in de maand Mei 1834 in Overijssel en Gelderland gedaan…’. I would like to thank the Algemene Bank Nederland for permission to use this archive.

25. A.R.A., N.H.M., nr. 2001, Bijlagen tot de Notulen van de Directievergaderingen 1839, le halfjaar, Bijlage 3463.

26. A.R.A., N.H.M., Bijlagen tot de Notulen van de Directievergaderingen 1835–1840, passim.

27. Boot, , Twentsche Katoennijverheid, pp. 193–4, 198–200.Google Scholar

28. Mastboom, , ‘Eastern Gelderland’, pp. 62–75.Google Scholar

29. Tolsma, H., ‘“Reders” en “wevers” in Winterswijk’, Nieuwe Winterswijkse Courant, April 15, 1966Google Scholar; Boot, and Blonk, , Smiet- tot Snelspoel, pp. 12–13Google Scholar; van Bel, J. G., De Linnenhandel van Amsterdam in de XVIIe Eeuw (Amsterdam, 1940), pp. 14–15, 20.Google Scholar

30. van Blom, D., ‘Boerenerfrecht (met name in Gelderland en Utrecht)’ in De Economist 64 (1915), pp. 849ff.CrossRefGoogle ScholarHofstee, E.W., De Demografische Ontwikkeling van Nederland in the eerste helft van de Negentiende Eeuw (n.p., 1978), p. 105.Google Scholar This phenomenon continued well into the twentieth century.

31. Competition came from England, Scotland, Ireland, Flanders, Silesia, and Müsterland. Boot, J.A.P.G., ‘Fabrikeurs en Textielzaken Omstreeks 1750’ in Textielhistorische Bijdragen 5 (1964), p. 26.Google Scholarvan Bath, B. H. Slicher, ‘Historische Ontwikkeling van de Textielnijverheid in Twente’ in Textielhistorisch Bijdragen 2 (1961), p. 34.Google Scholar

32. On the one hand, in the case of mixed textiles, labor costs weighed relatively less in the final price because of the high price of cotton in the eighteenth century; on the other hand, patterned linens and linen table cloths required more skill on the part of the weavers and therefore had a higher value. Some weavers in the area used cotton as early as 1646, but it was not widespread until after 1750. See ‘Bombazijnfabrikage te Bredevoort in 1657’ in Textielhistorisch Bijdragen 7 (1966), pp. 74–6Google Scholar, and Boot, , ‘Fabrikeurs’, pp. 33–4, 39.Google ScholarBoot, J.A.P.G., ‘De Markt voor Twents-Achterhoekse Weefsels in de Tweede Helft van de 18de Eeuw’ in Textielhistorische Bijdragen 16 (1975), pp. 25–29.Google ScholarMastboom, , ‘Eastern Gelderland’, pp. 111–20.Google Scholar

33. Mastboom, , ‘Eastern Gelderland’, pp. 127–34Google Scholar. Roessingh, , ‘Landbouw in de Noordelijke Nederlanden 1650–1815’ in Algemene Geschiedenis der Nederlanden 8 (Haarlem, 1979), pp. 57, 61–6.Google Scholar

34. Cf. Vanhaute, Eric, ‘Wolverwerking op het Turnhoutse Platteland (1750–1850)’ in Tijdschrift voor Sociale Geschiedenis 17 (1991).Google Scholar He argues that in the rural region of Turnhout (Belgium) rural industry was integrated in ‘a regionally self-sufficient, agricultural family economy, without dismantling that economy's base. On the contrary, it functioned… as a safety net for the loss of work and income after the disappearance of the [rural industrial] sector. This highlights the flexibility and dynamics of regional agricultural organization.’ Quote on p. 47.

35. See Brugmans, , Paardenkracht en Mensenmacht: Sociaal-Economische Geschiedenis van Nederland 1795–1940 (The Hague, 1983,) pp. 21ff.Google Scholar

36. In 1812 a provincial official wrote to the central government that the weavers in Winterswijk and Dinxperlo had suffered much as a result of the maritime war and that their number had dwindled to barely a quarter of the old days. A year later, the mayor of Neede complained that ‘… goods are not shipped but are piled up like bricks in Amsterdam and elsewhere which means that manufacturers lay off their workers’. See Gedenkstukken der Algemeene Geschiedenis van Nederland van 1795 tot 1840 6 (The Hague, 1912), p. 1332Google Scholar, and Gemeente Archief (G.A.) Neede, ‘Brieven & Besluiten die worden afgezonden door den Maire, aangelegt den 11 Mey 1813’, letter to the sous prefect, 1 September 1813. The word translated here as worker, was knecht in the original which is closer to helper or assistant.

37. Weaving for domestic use continued throughout this period and the rest of the nineteenth century. Even though peasant/weavers could no longer sell much cloth to fabrikeurs (merchant manufacturers), they made it for use by their own families and servants. Therefore, weaving skills and looms continued to exist in most rural households, even among those people who no longer considered themselves weavers. Some weavers in Winterswijk found a unique solution to their problems. It was reported in 1811 that every year in February or March, fifteen weavers left Winterswijk for Friesland to weave there until the fall. Rijksarchief in Gelderland (R.A.G.), Bataafs-Franse Archieven (B.F.A.), nr. 5487, Opgaven van werklieden in dit departement,…1811; nr. 7486, Lijst en staat houden opgaaf over 1811, 1812 van de seizoen arbeiders…

38. Damsma, D., de Meere, J.M.M.. Noordegraaf, L., Statistieken der 19e Eeuw, Supplement (The Hague, 1979)Google Scholar. R.A.G., Gedeputeerde Staten, Verhuisnummer 458, Staat der fabrieken en trafieken in de provincie Gelderland op den eersten Augustus 1816.

39. R.A.G., Provinciate Staten, Verslag Provincie Gelderland, 1834.

40. R.A.G., Gedeputeerde Staten, 25.05 Handel en Nijverheid, 1/1 105/1, 74/1, 45/1, 33/1, 23/1, 67/1, 15/1; Provinciale Staten, Verslag Provincie Gelderland, 1835, 1839. Gouverneur/Commissaris der Koning, Verbalen 6–3–1847, Nominatieve opgaaf der fabrieken in de provincie Gelderland… A.R.A., N.H.M., nrs. 1996–2034, Bijlagen tot de Notulen van de Directievergaderingen 1835–1860. J.W. Meyerink Kasboek 1935.

41. R.A.G., Provinciate Staten, Verslag Provincie Gelderland 1841, 1842, 1843. Calico weaving in Arnhem, 's Heerenberg and Ruurlo stopped.

42. Mansvelt, , Nederlandsche Handel-Maatschappij, 2:108, 113.Google Scholar

43. Terlouw, Frida, ‘De Aardappelziekte in Nederland in 1845 en Volgende Jaren’, Economischen Sociaal-Historisch Jaarboek 34 (1971).Google Scholar

44. R.A.G., Gedeputeerde Staten, 25.05 Handel en Nijverheid (n.40 above); Provinciate Staten, Verslag Provincie Gelderland (n.40 above). Gouverneur/Comminssaris der Koning, (n.40 above).

45. Boot, , Twentsche Katoennijverheid, pp. 85–9.Google Scholar

46. R.A.G., Gedeputeerde Staten, 3.313/1, /15, /23, /33, /45, /74, Gemeente Verslagen Aalten, Borculo, Dinxperlo, Eibergen, Groenlo, Neede, 1850–1854. G.A. Winterswijk, Niew Archief, nr. 320 Verslagen, Winterswijk, 1850–1854.

47. Boot, , Twentsche Katoennijverheid, pp. 119, 88–9, 247.Google Scholar

48. R.A.G., Gedeputeerde Staten, 3.313/1, /15, /23, /33, /45, /74, Gemeente Verslagen Aalten, Borculo, Dinxperlo, Eibergen, Groenlo, Neede, 1856–1860. G.A. Winterswijk, Nieuw Archief, nr 320 Verslagen… Winterswijk, 1857–1860. For Eibergen see also R.A.G., Gedeputeerde Staten, 25.05 Nijverheid, 33/1.

49. R.A.G., Gedeputeerde Staten, 3.313/1 Gemeente Verslagen Aalten 1855–1858; 25.05 Nijverheid, 1/1 Aalten, 105/1 Winterswijk, 74/1 Neede. Ledeboer, A., ‘De Nederlandsche Katoennijverheid Sedert 1860. Gegevens en Beschouwingen’, De Economist 41 (1892), p. 581.CrossRefGoogle Scholarvan Schelven, A.L., ‘Een Overzicht van de Twents-Achterhoekse Textielindustrie uit 1867’, Textielhistorische Bijdragen 3 (1962), pp. 117–18.Google Scholar

50. G.A. Aalten, Drost en Geerfden, nr. 155, Kohieren voor de Inning van de ‘Liberate Gift’. A.R.A., Nassause Domeinraad, Hingman, nrs. 5413–5413a, Rapport, p. 22. R.A.G., B.F.A., nr. 234, Lijsten van het Aantal Zielen…, 1795. Landbouwhogeschool Wageningen, Afd. Sociale en Economische Geografie, ‘Loop van de bevolking in de gemeente …’.

51. See Mastboom, ‘Eastern Gelderland’, pp. 158–60. Note that there is no clear connection between the expansion of rural industry and population growth. Rural industry did not expand until the 1830s, while population growth took off at the beginning of the century. Moreover, population growth in the eastern Achterhoek was smaller than in the province as a whole, i.e., areas without rural industry grew most rapidly. The reasons for this are not clear, but it has been argued that anerbenrecht encouraged smaller families because only one child would inherit. Increased employment opportunities decreased the importance of inheriting the farm, but apparently eastern Achterhoekers did not view this as a reason to discard old customs and traditions that had helped them survive for so long. See ibid., pp. 229–30.

52. van Zanden, J.L., De Economische Ontwikkeling van de NederlandseLandbouw in de Negentiende Eeuw, 1800–1914 (Utrecht, Neth., 1985), p. 111.Google Scholar

53. See Mastboom, , ‘Eastern Gelderland’, pp. 146–9, 169–74.Google Scholar

54. Ownership of horses is a good measure of the growth of medium and large size farms in sandy regions because: a. Horses were expensive and ownership indicates a certain level of income, b. horses became less important as the decades wore on because they were no longer needed to haul turf around. It is therefore significant when their number increased; c. there is a close relationship between number of horses and size of farm. See Van Zanden, , Nederlandse Landbouw, pp. 375–7.Google Scholar

55. Ibid, pp. 329–30, and note 28. See also Mastboom, ‘Eastern Gelderland’, Appendix L. A parellel development took place in the municipality of Woensel in eastern Noord-Brabant (see figure 1). Between 1832 and 1880 the quantity of land under cultivation increased while the number of farmers decreased. Hence, the average size of farms grew, By 1880 there were fewer small farms and more medium-sized farms (5–15 ha). See van den Brink, Gabriël, “De Arbeid is Alles, de Mensch Niets…' Aard en Ontwikkeling van het Boerenbedrijf in de Kempen 1800–1900’ in Tijdschrift voor Sociale Geschiedenis 17 (1991), pp. 56–7.Google Scholar

56. A graphic example of a shift in emphasis from carpentry to farming is documented in a customer book kept by three generations of carpenter/farmers in the eastern Achterhoek between 1750 and 1820. See Mastboom, Joyce M., ‘The Emergence of an Independent Farmer in the Netherlands: an Analysis of the Customer Book of Three Generations of Peasant/Carpenters, 1750–1810’, paper presented at the American Historical Association meetings, 1990.Google Scholar

57. A.R.A., N.H.M., nr. 1997, Bijlagen…1836, Circulaire 30 Juli; nr. 2000, Bijlagen…1838 2e halfjaar, Circulaire Juli.

58. R.A.G., Gedeputeerde Staten, 3.313/15 Borculo 1851, 3.313/23 Dinxperlo, 1853; G.A. Winterswijk, Gemeente Verslag 1853.

59. A.R.A., N.H.M., nr. 2000, Bijlagen…1838 2e halfjaar, 19 September 1838, bijlage 5906, Rapport over eene reize naar Overijssel en Gelderland van 20 tot 28 Augustus 1838.

60. Ligterink, G.H., De Landverhuizers. Emigranten naar Noord-Amerika uit het Gelders-Westfaalse Grensgebied tussen dejaren 1830–1850 (Zutphen, Neth., 1981), pp. 33–4, 15, 121–3.Google Scholar

61. ‘Landverhuizing onder de Heerlijkheden’, Mededeelingen en Handelingen van de Geldersche Maatscliappij van Landbouw 2 (1847), pp. 273–5, 278–81.Google Scholar

62. See Mastboom, , ‘Eastern Gelderland’, pp. 212–4.Google Scholar

63. ‘[This] opens up a depressing future for the lower classes of the population; in many places manufacturing has been emphasized at the expense of agriculture. Already numerous weavers cannot find work anymore, and as a result of the reduction in prices, incomes have been much reduced as well.’ R.A.G., Provinciale Staten, Verslag Provincie Gelderland 1840.

64. See Mastboom ‘Eastern Gelderland’, Appendix J, Table J.3. See also figure 3 above.

65. G.A. Winterswijk, Nieuw Archief, nr. 320 Gemeente Verslagen Winterswijk 1862–1865. H. Willink & Co.'s factory worked throughout the Civil War.

66. See Scranton, , ‘None-Too-Porous Boundaries’, p. 736.Google Scholar