Remote Working: The Middle Ages Did It Better

-Analysis-

LECCO — The flickering light of the fireplace illuminates the wooden walls of the hovel. Outside, the air is frigid and dry. In the frozen fields, there will be nothing to do for another month. Three children sleep on a straw mattress, while a man and a woman sit in front of the hearth, murmuring a folk song. Their hands, rough from farm work, quickly manipulate coarse wool, drawing threads from it that they comb to clean, weaving them together to make a neat skein of yarn.

Someone knocks on the door. The man gets up, puts on a cloth overcoat, opens it. Another man enters, dressed in expensive clothes; it’s easy to tell he is from the city. The two have been expecting him and greet him in good spirits. They pour him a small glass of brandy, invite him to warm himself by the fire and exchange small talk about his route. Then they hand him two baskets of yarn, help him load them onto the cart pulled by a mule waiting outside. The man leaves some silver coins on the table, says goodbye and leaves.

That scene was repeated countless times across the European countryside from the 14th century to the late 18th century (and in some areas even longer). It is an example of the “putting-out system” for English-speaking economic historians, the “Verlagsystem” in the Germanic area, or “domestic labor” in Italy. The concept is simple: merchants with capital to put out use workers to take care of one or more stages in the manufacture of a product — without this necessarily being their main full-time occupation — providing them with the necessary materials and tools.

Work according to the seasons

The late Middle Ages and the modern age saw the development of a proto-industrial economic system, which already had some traits of the production logics that would come full circle with the major revolution that began in mid-18th century Britain (that of immense textile mills, steam engines, working children, Charles Dickens, smoke-stained cities, and the first labor unions).

A series of socioeconomic changes, which began around the year 1000 and were accelerated by the Plague in the 14th century, had disrupted the functioning of production chains from raw material sourcing to final sale, retail and wholesale.

Fashions, trends and needs also changed: from peasants to kings, people needed and wanted traditional and innovative textiles. Cities that we now consider medieval gems or cradles of renaissance owe their fortunes to weaving. To meet the high demand for textiles from the rest of Europe, in Flanders and north-central Italy, merchants began to find cheap labor in the suburbs of large manufacturing centers and in the smaller towns around them, especially in the countryside.

Rural work was tied to the seasons, leaving intervals of free time that could be exploited.

There, many workers had employment tied to the seasons, leaving intervals of free time that could be exploited to round out wages, which were often close to subsistence. The town merchant (some historians already venture to call him an entrepreneur, somewhat ahead of his time) chose to invest his capital in raw materials and tools.

Those were supplied to the workers, who processed the products and were paid by the piece. Payment was often divided: a portion upon delivery of the material, the rest upon reception of the finished product.This system was extremely functional, not only because it allowed the stages of work to be divided in a way that was optimal for the client, but also because it lowered wage costs.

Urban workers demanded higher wages. In the countryside, work was outside the orbit of urban trade guilds, which networked against “masters.” Moreover, this kind of work was almost always considered to be a way to occupy otherwise unproductive periods. So rural workers were willing to make do with lower pay.

The putting-out-system

Inaugurated by Flemish and Tuscan wool and textile merchants in general, this system was soon imitated by many manufacturers throughout the economically dynamic and densely populated strip of land stretching from Tuscany to the Flemish coast. Swiss watchmaking was based on the Verlagsystem throughout the modern age, as were wooden productions along the Rhine Valley.

The demise of this integrated system — with the technical and logistical innovations of the Industrial Revolution that spread like wildfire in the 18th century — slowly brought an end to large-scale domestic labor. The hemorrhage of human capital to industrial cities became irrepressible. And the heart of production settled permanently in giant urban centers.

The pre-industrial distribution of populations was virtuous and allowed acceptable standards of living.

But the phenomenon of the putting-out system is not bound to the past; it allows for some reflections. First, the organization of production respected the seasons and human capacities, and there were limits not to be exceeded.

Moreover, research shows that, in pre-industrial economically dynamic areas, the distribution of populations across urban centers, smaller towns and the countryside was virtuous and allowed acceptable standards of living for many. That is compared to unbalanced arrangements that favor cities and urbanization at all costs.

This is not to say, of course, that the situation of workers in the Middle Ages was better than it is today. Yet this history of labor can contribute to debates over the current crisis: workers’ different awarenesses toward certain situations.

Even in the work environment, past solutions could provide insight in the face of an economic system that demonstrates its weakest and most inhumane aspects day after day.