經濟學dissertation范文：Contribution of Women to the Economy in the Middle Ages
本文是經濟學專業的留學生dissertation范例，題目是“Contribution of Women to the Economy in the Middle Ages（中世紀婦女對經濟的貢獻）”，將重點研究中世紀婦女對經濟的貢獻。它將探索女性如何以及在多大程度上對中世紀英格蘭的經濟做出貢獻，并提出“歷史是否低估了女性在中世紀經濟中的作用?”的問題。作為這一研究的一部分，它將探索女性在多大程度上在當代資源中得到充分反映，如果她們沒有得到充分反映，目的是解釋其原因。
經濟學dissertation怎么寫
Introduction
This dissertation will focus on the contribution of women to the economy in the Middle Ages. It will explore how and to what extent women contributed to the economy of Medieval England, asking the question of ‘Is the role of women in the medieval economy undervalued by history?’. As part of this it will explore to what extent women are adequately reflected in the contemporary sources, and if they are not adequately reflected, aim to explain the reasons for this. It is also interesting to see if the contributions made by women vary depending on their social status and whether they reside in the urban or the rural environment. It is important to explore and aim to discover whether the contribution women made to the economy changed over time, whether it is to an increased contribution or a decreased one due to certain events or social changes. Clearly the role of men in society in the middle ages will be of great significance due to their large influence on the lives of women.
In order to fully understand and appreciate the contribution which women made to the economy in the Middle Ages it is important to look at how they worked alone, but also how women were recognised and treated alongside men, especially those who were engaged in a similar occupation. The role of women alongside their husband is also of great importance. Historians such as Christopher Brooke have often argued that women cannot be studied without also studying the men of the period. It is also advantageous to compare a woman’s work in the town to the work which women in the countryside were engaged in. Perhaps an aspect within this which could be explored is whether or not the work which women participated in changed over time, particularly after the Black Death. To look at all of the above, individual places will be looked at, for example the city of London and the town of Wakefield, but also individual people, especially those who appear in the court rolls on numerous occasions. It is difficult however to look at working class women in much detail as their lives were not as well documented as a woman of a higher social class and status. Also, the majority of sources used have been written by and for men.
為了充分理解和理解女性在中世紀對經濟的貢獻，我們必須了解她們是如何獨立工作的，以及女性是如何被認可和對待的，尤其是那些從事類似職業的男性。婦女在丈夫身邊的作用也非常重要。克里斯托弗·布魯克(Christopher Brooke)等歷史學家經常認為，研究女性離不開研究那個時期的男性。把城鎮婦女的工作與農村婦女所從事的工作進行比較也是有利的。也許其中可以探討的一個方面是婦女參與的工作是否隨著時間而改變，特別是在黑死病之后。要研究以上所有問題，我們會考察單個地方，比如倫敦市和韋克菲爾德鎮，但也會考察個人，特別是那些多次出現在法庭名單上的人。然而，由于工人階級婦女的生活并沒有像更高社會階層和地位的婦女那樣被很好地記錄下來，因此很難對她們進行詳細的研究。而且，大部分的資料都是由男人寫的，也為男人寫的。
Typically, when looking at the middle ages, the work of women can be overlooked as it is often assumed that they simply worked in the home. Although this is not strictly true, it is important to look at the work which women undertook in the home and whether or not and to what extent this work impacted on any other work which they might have been undertaking. It is sometimes difficult to assess the work which women did as very few women in the middle ages were literate, and therefore when they do appear in records it is nearly always from a male perspective, in records written for males. This creates a certain difficulty in truly understanding what women participated in, as it is often assumed that they simply worked in the house and there are no sources which concentrate purely on work undertaken in the household. Along with this, men often appeared in place of women in court rolls. This was often due to the fact that a man would pay the fine for a woman who had done wrong, for example brewing outside of the assize given by the manor. However, there are also a large number of instances where women do appear alongside men at court. It is important to recognise here however that women could often be found undertaking jobs inside their homes, for example textile work. This will also be considered.
Chapter one of this dissertation will mainly focus on women and the household. It will look in detail at the role which women played in the household. It will explore their role as both a wife and a mother but also their eventual role as a widow. Sources are scarce for this aspect of life in the Middle Ages but ones which do provide a useful insight include court rolls where women asked permission to marry. A main issue here is the amount of sources which are available to utilise for this aspect of a woman’s life. With few sources available it is understandably difficult to distinguish whether these women recorded in the sources are typical of society or anomalies.
Chapter two will look at women’s work in the home. As part of this the textile industry will be looked at, as well as the roles of women in domestic service and agricultural activity and markets. Within this there are various primary sources which can be utilised. These include court rolls, coroners’ rolls and weavers’ ordinances. There are of course various limitations to each of the sources. Perhaps the main one to consider here is that sources were generally written by males and for males. As well as this there are limited mentions of women in domestic service, although they are not as limited as the sources on women in the home in general.
Chapter three evaluates women’s work outside of the home. It looks at the occupation of brewing and uses sources such as coroners’ rolls and court rolls to look at the extent to which women could be found in this profession. It also explores prostitution as a lesser thought of economic contribution.
Together it seeks to discover the contribution of women to the medieval economy whilst asking whether or not the women are adequately reflected in the sources, and whether as a result of this, these women have been undervalued by history.
Women And The Household 女性與家庭
It is arguable how much of a woman’s life was spent in the household looking after the family unit. It is typically thought that a large amount of a woman’s time was spent in the home and although this is supported to an extent by the majority of sources, there are also a significant number which dispute it. A large number of historians, such as Christopher Dyer, Jennifer Ward and Joanne Bennett have looked at the everyday lives of women and various conclusions have been drawn from their studies. It is important to look at the conclusions of both historians who argue that women spent the majority of their time in the home, and those who argue that women, like men, were able to hold an occupation, as well as working for the family. As well as this, some historians have argued that there was a difference in the way in which women contributed to the household depending on their social class. All of these factors are important when looking at the work women did, as any work undertaken in their household would have had an impact on the amount of paid work which they were able to undertake. It is worth noting that if a woman did not undertake paid work and worked only in the household, it is not likely to have been recorded and so makes it difficult to find information on these women.
The role of a woman as both a wife and mother in the household is an important one. Women were initially regarded as the property of men and this is reflected by a large number of women asking for permission to marry at the manor courts. An example of this is the court roll of 27 February 1360 from the manor of Walsham le Willows where Agnes Jay ‘pays 4s fine for leave to marry Robert Lene. Being married meant that a woman had a greater right to security and property than she would have had as a single woman as she sometimes gained joint tenancy with her husband. This joint tenancy over their house and belongings can be seen in court rolls, for example in the court of 16 August 1369. At this court ‘William de Preston…and Alice his wife…sold to William Kent…certain utensils in a house which he held from them’. The fact that Alice and William together agreed to sell items in a house which they jointly owned shows that Alice had rights to property, which she may not have had if she were single. However, these rights changed once more when a woman was widowed. Every woman who had been married to a freeman of the city became a freewoman of the city on his death. Whilst this is a good thing for women, it carried the condition that she only retained this status as long as she stayed single. Whilst living with their husband women were expected to learn about his work in order for them to cover whilst their husband was away but also so that they could continue his business on his death. There are numerous cases in sources of women taking over the business of their husbands and in some instances continuing to train any apprentices their husband may have had. This can be used to show that women were not as restricted as they are often assumed to be.
Widows seem to appear much more frequently in sources than married or single women. This is most likely to be due to the fact that they do no have a male to answer for them or to represent them. Males are frequently seen in documents and it is often argued that they took fines on behalf of their wives. This is mainly because a man was commonly seen as in charge of his wife and the family and therefore he was held responsible for anything which they did. Also, widows are commonly seen in court rolls seeking money or property owed to them, something which their husband would previously have done. This can be illustrated with the case of Alice de Perers of the city of London who sued Richard de Kent for 200 marks which she had lent him and not been returned. We can assume that Alice was a widow as she was representing herself in the court and was not presented as a ‘wife of’ someone else.
However, whilst it is commonly thought that men were in control of their household, there are some who argue that they were in fact not in control at all. Historians such as Ward argue that the household was a place which women ruled. She argues that the running of the household and the care of the family within it took up a large amount of a woman’s time and that as well as this a woman should also be able to help her husband with his job. Historians such as Dyer however, argue that while a woman in the aristocracy would have been the effective head of household, the household itself was predominantly masculine. This can be illustrated by the amount of males employed within the upper class household, for example servants and officers. In comparison there were relatively few female employees. Dyer observes that a peasant woman was expected to manage her household, but that she could also choose to have her own employment as long as it was secondary to any household chores she was expected to complete. It can be construed that though men were perceived to be the head of the household it was in fact the women who were responsible for everything within it.
It is important to realise that being a wife and a mother was often just part of the work which women were expected to undertake. In some cases they were also able to hold their own employment, as well as helping their husbands with their businesses. Therefore we can see that women could hold jobs both inside and outside of the home, both of which are important when looking at the contribution of women to the economy and whether or not their role has been undervalued by history.
It is important to realise that being a wife and a mother was often just part of the work which women were expected to undertake. In some cases they were also able to hold their own employment, as well as helping their husbands with their businesses. Therefore we can see that women could hold jobs both inside and outside of the home, both of which are important when looking at the contribution of women to the economy and whether or not their role has been undervalued by history.
重要的是要意識到，做一個妻子和母親通常只是女性應該承擔的工作的一部分。在某些情況下，她們還能自己創業，也能幫助丈夫做生意。因此，我們可以看到，婦女可以在家庭內外都有工作，這兩者都是重要的，當看婦女對經濟的貢獻，以及她們的角色是否被低估的歷史。
Work In The Home 在家工作
i. Textiles
J. Ward has argued that when women were not engaged in work in the home they were able to hold occupations for which they were paid. She argues that whilst a woman was free to do this, not all did and the majority of those that were employed worked in industries similar to work which they would have been doing in the home. An industry which employed a large number of women was the textile industry. Women were able to spin, weave and embroider from their own home if they chose to, which enabled them to continue with their household duties. Also, the majority of women were unable to be engaged in any occupation significantly different to their duties in the home as they only received a very basic education, as well as having to fully utilise the skills which they had been taught by their mothers. There were of course exceptions to the above and they will be considered in turn. The textile industry was one which is evident in both the town and the countryside, though more predominantly in the countryside and smaller towns after the thirteenth century. Textile work was more notable in homes in the countryside but it was not unusual for a woman to move to the town and take her work with her. This is significant as historians such as Dyer have suggested that it was much harder to come across skilled textile work in the towns unless the woman in question was skilled and had the money required for all the necessary equipment. An interesting point to make here is that whilst men were limited to being able to participate in one industry, women could participate in two or three if she chose. It is therefore not uncommon to find women working as spinners and weavers for example.
Ward continues her argument by suggesting that women were engaged in the textile trade purely to provide clothes for her family. This can be supported with Anthony Fitzherbert’s
The Boke of Husbandry. Written in 1523 Fitzherbert outlines basic tasks expected of a wife in her home, but also within her work in and around the home. He outlines in great detail the importance of the textile industry and how a husband should have sheep of his own but ‘let his wife have part of the wool to make her husband and herself some clothes’. This illustrates the argument that women were engaged in the textile industry purely to provide clothes for their families. However, other sources provide a different perspective. Women were referred to by their trade in court rolls if they were the head of the household, for example ‘Joan Spinster’, ‘Agnes, servant of…’. For them to be referred to as spinners as opposed to ‘his wife’ or ‘wife of’, it can be assumed that they were engaging in a significantly larger amount of textile work than simply that required for their family. This of course would not have been the case for all women.
Whilst textiles remained a main occupation of women until the late eighteenth century, it did have periods of decline within both the thirteenth century and the late mid to late fifteenth century. The decline in the market for textiles is illustrated by Weavers’ ordinances. Weavers’ ordinances show a declining market, as well as employment opportunities, as they were designed to go together with local monopolies on particular cloth. In some towns the monopoly stretched as far as to limiting each employer to one apprentice each. In the weavers’ ordinance of Shrewsbury from 1448 it describes how ‘no woman shall occupy the craft of weaving after the death of her husband except for one quarter of the year’. This illustrates a distinct decline in the occupation, but can also be used to show that women were not as free to participate in an occupation as they maybe once seemed. It can also be used to suggest that widows were not as free as maybe once thought. As well as this it supports the suggestion that women found it hard to move their craft from the countryside to the town unless they had significant amounts of money and they were highly skilled. It is possible that this was a minor cause in the decline in the textiles industry in the thirteenth century when cloth making originally took place for home and for export in larger towns but moved to taking place mainly in the countryside or smaller towns, with a distinct decline in exports. Despite this decline it has been estimated that in towns such as Babergh Hundred in Suffolk up to nineteen percent of the population was still employed within textiles, and this is not including the women who were part time spinners, who would have added a considerable amount to this. This illustrates how women were continuing to engage in textile work throughout the period.
As mentioned previously, women were expected to fully understand the business of their husband so that they may take over in his absence or on his death. This is illustrated in the textile industry in the case of the will of John Walton, a weaver from York. He states that he leaves to ‘Margaret my wife my best woollen loom with those things to pertain it’. This shows how women were able to take over the business from their husbands if necessary and therefore displays their capabilities. Wills such as these can also be used to show how women gained from their husbands only if they remained single. Women were able to retain freewoman status if their husband had been a freeman of the city, but only if they stayed single. The will of John Nonhouse, also from York, shows this to an extent. He states that ‘Isabel my wife has the said two looms with all he tools pertaining to them whilst sole’. These two wills together show how women had the ability to continue work on their own after the death of their husband. They can however also be used to show how society had not fully accepted the majority of women who were working on their own. The absence of women from craft guilds can also be used to show the exclusion of women working on their own. The guild ordinances of York show us how ‘No woman of the said craft shall occupy the said craft after her husband’s death longer than a whole year’. This again illustrates the limitation of women on their own as opposed to those women who were married. It has often been argued by historians that it was the husband who gave the woman their social status and this supports the argument that single women were limited to crafts they could participate in.
These factors together show how women were employed in the textiles industry throughout the Middle Ages. However, they also to an extent show how women were often employed and working as a result of their husband as while they may gain the equipment used in textiles after his death, they very rarely retained their position in the craft guild. This in turn made selling their products more difficult. Also, women participated in a larger amount of textile work than perhaps thought, although the sources to support this are fewer in number and within them it is difficult to find the women of the lower classes.
經濟學dissertation范文參考
ii. Agricultural Activity And Markets
Throughout the Middle Ages farming was an important part of everyday life. The main priority when farming was not to produce for sale but to produce and provide for their own family, selling any excess they may have made. Women in the countryside and small sized towns were expected to help out on the land when they had completed their tasks in the home and the majority can be seen as capable of the agricultural tasks required of them. Farm work however did not produce a large amount of money as the majority of it was undertaken part time and the first objective was to feed the family. It is significant to note the way in which women contributed to agricultural work both before the Black Death and after it. This is due to the fact that the Black Death caused a great amount of changes to take place and this therefore impacted on women and their contribution.
In the period before the Black Death it was common for members of peasant households to be called upon by the lord of the manor to carry out some agricultural work for him. Most peasants would carry out this work as they did receive payment for it, albeit a small one, but on some occasions it would not get done. This could be due to extensive amounts of work needing doing on their own land or in some case just choosing not to do it. Those individuals who did not work for the lord as required were called to court and fined. This can be seen in the manor of Walsham le Willows where ‘Christina Lene and Isabelle Spileman each amerced 3d. because they were summoned to winnow the lord’s corn…and did not come’. This is significant as both of these being fined were women. Again it is possible to suggest that these women are either widows or are acting as head of their household while their husband is away. In either case it is a possibility that they did not winnow the lord’s corn as they had too much work to complete in their own households or on their own land.
A source which is of great importance when it comes to agricultural work is Walter of Henley’s The Husbandry. Walter of Henley was an agricultural writer who wrote more than thirty sources on how to carry out agricultural procedures correctly. It also outlined what was expected of each person on the land. However, only ten of these sources give his name as the author and they have therefore caused much discussion amongst historians.
The Husbandry was a highly read source. We know this due to the amount of copies of it which had been made, but also because of the amount of copies which have survived until today. Although it is thought that it was written around the 1250s it has caused much discussion amongst historians as to its original date. Despite this it remains a useful source for looking at agriculture in the Middle Ages.
One part Walter of Henley’s The Husbandry outlines the role of the dairymaid on the land. Women were mainly responsible for the poultry and the dairy of the land and so it can be argued that The Husbandry outlined their role in full as it would have the role of a man on the land. It states how ‘the dairymaid ought to look after all the small stock which are kept on the manor such as…geese…hens…chickens and eggs’. It is arguable here that women were responsible for the livestock as the nurturing role required was similar to that they would have deployed in the home. These women who had been responsible for the dairy and poultry on the land were also often responsible for taking it to and selling it at the local market. Women of the manor could often be found selling cheese and poultry amongst other fresh produce. It is because of these trips to the local markets that we can see some of these women in coroner’s rolls. An example here is of Margaret Derbye of Bury, recorded in the Coroner’s rolls of Sussex in 1524. Margaret is recorded as ‘hurrying to Petworth market on horse’ and being thrown off of her horse. In the impact of landing on the ground she injured her neck and died immediately. This case of a woman dying on her way to market shows how women were directly involved in the selling process. It also illustrates a woman’s contribution to not only maintaining the land but also making a profit from it.
亨利的《畜牧業》中有一部分描述了擠奶女工在土地上的角色。婦女主要負責家禽和農場的奶牛場因此可以認為，農牧協會將她們的角色描繪得和男人一樣。它規定“擠奶女工應當照料莊園里所有的小家畜，比如……鵝……母雞……雞和雞蛋”。這是有爭議的，在這里，婦女負責牲畜，因為所需的養育角色類似于她們會部署在家里。這些負責奶牛和家禽的婦女也經常負責把它們帶到當地市場上出售。莊園里的婦女經常在賣奶酪和家禽等新鮮農產品。正是因為這些去當地市場的旅行，我們才能在驗尸官的名單上看到一些這樣的女性。一個例子是伯里的瑪格麗特·德拜，記錄在1524年蘇塞克斯的驗尸官名冊上。據記錄，瑪格麗特“騎著馬匆忙趕到佩特沃斯市場”，然后從馬上摔了下來。在落地的沖擊中，她的頸部受傷，立即死亡。這個婦女在去市場的路上死亡的案例表明，婦女是如何直接參與銷售過程的。它還說明了女性不僅對維護土地做出了貢獻，而且還從中獲利。
