Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reviewed by: Servants in Rural Europe: 1400-1900 ed. by Jane Whittle Jeanne Clegg Whittle, Jane, ed. – Servants in Rural Europe: 1400-1900. Woodbridge, UK: The Boydell Press, 2017. Pp. 284. After years of neglect in favour of "productive" labour, scholars have, over the past few decades, come to recognize the importance of service labour for understanding the economic, social, and cultural history of Europe and beyond. As the work of the Cambridge Group for the Study of Population and Social Structure showed in the 1960s, in preindustrial England servants made up a significant proportion of the population, and perhaps 60% of its youth. In the late 1970s, the group's founder, Peter Laslett, identified live-in service as one of the three key characteristics of the Western family, and E. A. Wrigley described it as both an essential form of de facto family planning and a mechanism for redeploying surplus labour. Since then, scholars from Ilana Krausman Ben-Amos (Adolescence and Youth in Early Modern England, 1994) to Sheila McIsaac Cooper and other contributors to the [End Page 450] Servant Project (Proceedings of the Servant Project = Actes du Servant Project, 2001-2005) have examined the roles played by life-cycle service in the maturing of young men and women from a wide variety of backgrounds, offering opportunities to acquire practical and social skills, contacts, and the economic resources needed to become independent and marry. And since all but the poorest of early modern households included at least one servant, we can—as Tim Meldrum (Domestic Service and Gender, 1660-1750, 2000), Laura Gowing (Common Bodies, 2003), and Paula Humfrey (The Experience of Domestic Service for Women in Early Modern London, 2011) have shown—also learn about employers' lives through the experience of those who served them, while Douglas Hay and Paul Craven's work on master and servant legislation (Masters, Servants, and Magistrates in Britain and the Empire, 1562-1955, 2004) illuminates the ways in which states attempted to regulate the development of wage labour. Running through Servants in Rural Europe is a productive dialogue/debate with the core concepts discussed in these and a myriad of other studies. Christine Fertig confirms the validity of the life-cycle model for northwestern Germany, where in the eighteenth century service offered younger generations training and helped redistribute surplus labour from peasant households with little land to those with high demand. Jeremy Hayhoe shows that throughout the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, Burgundy wine harvests continued to employ young men, but also older people and the children of peasant families themselves. Cristina Prytz, on the other hand, focuses closely on the experience of older, highly skilled servants in seventeenth- and eighteenth-century Sweden and emphasizes the attractions of life-long service. Writing of rural Norway in the same period, Hanne Østhus investigates mobility between various ways of earning a living, arguing that the very category of "servant" is one with "porous boundaries." Finally, in what is (rather regrettably) the only chapter to deal with southern Europe, Raffaella Sarti analyzes quantitative data available for several regions of Italy and across a broad time span, finding surprisingly high numbers of rural servants and of neo-local, "simple" families, findings that challenge accepted "geographies of service," and question simplistic applications of the European marriage pattern. This book, however, does more than revise received ideas: it opens up a field of research which—with the exception of the work of Ann Kussmaul (Servants in Husbandry in Early Modern England,1981)—has been almost wholly neglected. As the volume's editor, Jane Whittle reminds us in her introductory overview, "Early modern Europe was an overwhelmingly rural society: before 1800 at least 85 per cent of the population lived outside of large towns. The great majority of people, including servants, had some involvement in farming. Yet the literature on servants continues to the dominated by studies of urban and domestic servants" (p. 2). The essays brought together here help to redress this imbalance, providing in-depth analyses of the characteristics and working conditions of servants in specific agricultural contexts across Europe over five centuries. No grand, cohesive picture is offered. "The significance of local and regional variations as...
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.058 | 0.036 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".