Last week my post mentioned that women professionals were rare in the nineteenth century. Well, my research since has proven that to be untrue. There were plenty of professional females, be they producers, merchants or investors. Even at the beginning of the eighteenth century, single women handled ten percent of the business conducted in London. (18th Century Women Who Brought Home the Bacon)
Why are we under the misnomer that women had few options for earning a
living? All I can think is that women’s history is far less known than our male
counterparts and has been largely ignored until recently. An editorial in The
Times in 1857 states a long upheld, if false, belief about women’s options
being limited to “Marry-Stitch-Die-or Do Worse.”
Women, however, did that and much better. Plenty of women were successful entrepreneurs.
Female capital supported stock companies behind municipal utilities and railways
and setting up, or inheriting, and running their own enterprises.
“A little enterprise could secure for its proprietor many things: an income
that could be woven around domestic commitments; independence and a measure of
respectability; the preservation of her home and household; and a retirement
strategy.”
Alison Kay, The Foundations Of Female Entrepreneurship: Enterprise,
Home and Household in London c. 1800- 1870 p133
So, what could nineteenth century women do to earn a living of their own? It
depended on their financial background, skills, and, of course, their marital
status.
A lack of education limited lower-class women, and they had to rely on their
practical skills. They were usually required to find employment to help
contribute to their household, so their earnings were not their own. If women
were lucky enough to come from a family of manufacturers, they could learn the
skills they would need to set up in business on their own or take over from
their family if need be. Women who inherited property or money could set up and
run their own enterprises or invest their wealth.
Trade cards and insurance policies of the day provide a vast array of
evidence about some professions and enterprises women were involved in. The
most common were running lodging houses or inns, running establishments that
provided food and drink, education, dressmaking, and midwifery.
Trade cards have been found for less conventional professions, too, such as
Sarah Greenland, who was a tobacco and pipe maker, Mary Wiggett who was a
chimney sweep, and Dorothy Mercier who was a print-seller and stationer.
As usual, sexism came into play regarding how professional females were
viewed by society. While males were rewarded with praise and raised social
status, female entrepreneurs were often ridiculed and shamed. A woman having a
job was regarded as a sign of financial desperation rather than a desire for
success.
Propriety and the domestic demands of their households also limited women in
their business choices. Like many working women today, they had to balance
both.
Single women and widows had greater rights and freedoms than married women,
and they were at least entitled to keep their earnings. Anything a married
woman earned became her husband’s and most men would not yield financial
control over their wives. It is understandable why most female entrepreneurs in
the nineteenth century were single women or widows, but they still may have had
difficulty accessing their money. Male relatives would often feel the need to
interfere, especially if a woman’s assets were held in trust.
I hope you enjoyed this. In my next post, I will answer my question about
women and bank accounts.
If you want to add to this post, please leave a comment below.
Sources:
