Table 31
Land Ownership by Southern Appalachian Farm Operators, 1860
A. By State Subregion
______
Proportion of Households Operating Farms
Method # 1 Method # 2
All Landless With Adjustment for
AppalachianOperators Counted Kin of Farm Owners
Counties of: Owner Landless Owner Landless
______
Alabama .619 .381 .699.301
Georgia .575.425 .648.352
Kentucky .622.378 .738.262
Maryland .735.265 .781.219
North Carolina .666.334 .765.235
South Carolina .560.440 .652.348
Tennessee .588.412 .700.300
Virginia .698.302 .774.236
West Virginia .686.314 .788.212
Region .632.368 .732.268
______
B. By Terrain Type
______
Mountains .633 .367 .731 .269
Hills-Plateaus .652.348 .737 .263
Ridge-Valleys .628.372 .721 .279
Region .632 .368 .732 .268
______
Source: Derived from analysis of farm sample (n =3,447). Here "landless" farm operators include cash renters. For methods, see the website.
Table 32
Increased Wealth Inequality, 1810-1860 ______
% Total Wealth Owned by
Appalachian Top 10% of Households
Counties of: 1790-1810 1860
______
AlabamaNA 74.9
Georgia NA 63.7
Kentucky56.1 69.8
Maryland43.7 76.3
North Carolina 53.2 70.1
South Carolina 65.8 76.8
Tennessee 44.7 75.4
Virginia62.0 76.8
West Virginia64.9 81.9
Region 56.2 71.6
______
Sources: Frontier wealth estimates were derived from analysis of the 1790-1810 tax list samples (n = 10,264); see Appendix for sampling techniques and methodology. 1860 wealth estimates derived from analysis of sample of households (n = 3,056) drawn from the 1860 Census of Population enumerator manuscripts. For methods, see the website.
Table 33
Occupations of Free Appalachian Laborers, 1860
Part A. Agricultural Occupations
______
Tenants &
AppalachianFarmShare-Farm
Counties ofOwnerscroppers Laborers Total
______
Alabama46.1 16.5 17.0 79.6
Georgia &
South Carolina35.715.9 14.1 65.7
Kentucky51.615.6 13.1 80.3
Maryland17.5 4.9 12.6 35.0
North Carolina36.512.4 18.7 67.6
Tennessee40.613.1 21.7 75.4
Virginia19.6 7.8 5.9 33.3
West Virginia21.420.9 6.1 48.4
Region 29.9 13.5 12.7 56.1
______
Part B. Nonagricultural Occupations
______
Appalachian Commerce Domestic Manufacturing Informal
Counties of & Trade Professions Servants & Extractive Economy Total
______
Alabama5.90.91.3 7.2 5.1 20.4
Georgia &
South Carolina5.11.41.9 16.1 9.8 34.3
Kentucky2.90.80.4 6.9 5.7 16.7
Maryland8.42.23.0 27.9 23.5 65.0
North Carolina2.91.32.0 10.2 16.0 32.4
Tennessee2.71.62.1 8.6 9.6 24.6
Virginia11.32.84.0 28.4 20.2 66.7
West Virginia12.41.21.3 21.0 15.7 51.6
Region8.71.31.8 17.8 14.3 43.9
______
Source: Analysis of a systematic probability sample of 3,056 households drawn from the 1860 Census
of Population enumerator manuscripts.
Table 34
Semiproletarianized Farm Women in Nonagricultural Occupations, 1860
______
% Wives Listing
% Wives in Waged Nonwaged
Occupations Informal Sector
AppalachianOwner LandlessOwner Landless
Counties ofHshlds. Hshlds.Hshlds. Hshlds.
______
Alabama12.6 27.8 8.3 37.5
Georgia &
South Carolina18.4 31.419.4 42.4
Kentucky 25.2 21.711.7 26.7
Maryland 14.8 42.728.1 50.0
North Carolina 17.1 27.716.7 33.3
Tennessee12.8 34.717.5 40.0
Virginia 25.8 35.724.1 46.2
West Virginia 18.3 38.914.8 48.7
Region18.5 33.415.1 42.5
______
Source: Derived by cross-checking my systematic probability sample of 3,447 farms against the 1860 Census of Population enumerator manuscripts
This is a copyrighted document from the electronic archive for Wilma A. Dunaway, Southern Laboring Women: The Gendered Boundaries of Race, Ethnicity, and Class in Antebellum Appalachia, 1700-1860, Virginia Tech Library.
Table 35
Appalachian Women in Manufacturing and Industry, 1860, by Sector ______
Industrial Total Total % Labor Force
Category Females Workers Females
______
Textiles 1,002 1,57163.8
Calico Printing 1 333.3
Cotton Milling 431 60771.0
Clothing 333 46471.8
Gloves & Mittens 40 5967.8
Hats & Caps 11 4027.5
Millinery 67 7293.1
Wool Milling 110 31534.9
Household Goods 212 1,72312.3
Baskets, Brooms,
Carpets, Pottery 46 5682.1
Mattresses 3 475.0
Shoes & Boots 65 695 9.4
Soap & Candles 14 2360.9
Food Processing 26 2892.9
Agricultural Byproducts 806 6,84410.8
Meatpacking 67 13450.0
Tobacco Manufacturing 222 1,20218.5
Extractive Industry 2,336 15,54915.0
Iron Manufacturing 2,072 6,21633.3
Coal Mining 13 199 6.5
Tools & Hardware 0 1,632
Construction &
Building Materials 1 2,990 0.3
Industrial Machinery & Equipment 0 585
Paper Manufacturing 39 15028.5
Printing 7 2133.3
All 4,429 31,093 14.2
______
Source and Notes: I have not listed all subcategories under each major category of commodities. heading. Statistics were derived from analysis of Appalachian county totals in U.S. Census Office, Manufactures in 1860 and from Dunaway, First American Frontier, Tables 6.4, 6.5, and 6.6, pp. 171, 179, 176.
This is a copyrighted document from the electronic archive for Wilma A. Dunaway, Southern Laboring Women: The Gendered Boundaries of Race, Ethnicity, and Class in Antebellum Appalachia, 1700-1860, Virginia Tech Library.
Table 36
Commercially Finished Clothing and Household Textiles Proto-Industrialization
Part A. Commercial/Industrial Production of Clothing vs. Textile Home Manufactures
______
No. 1860 Artisan Shops 1860 No. 1860 Per Capita $ Value
AppalachianMilliner or Gloves Hats Clothing All Finished Textile Home
Counties ofDressmaker & Mittens & Caps Factories Clothing Manufactures
______
Alabama 0 0 0 1 0.14 4.38
Georgia 0 0 0 1 0.23 2.27
Kentucky 0 0 1 1 0.06 3.15
Maryland 12 5 3 11 1.24 0.11
North Carolina 0 0 0 3 0.27 4.12
South Carolina 0 0 0 0 0 3.23
Tennessee 0 0 0 10 0.43 3.60
Virginia 3 4 7 22 0.66 1.55
West Virginia 2 0 3 23 0.43 1.40
Region17 9 14 72 0.43 2.65
______
Part B. Impact of Textiles Factories on Household Textile Proto-industrialization
______
Per Capita $ Value of Textiles Home Manufactures
In CountiesIn Counties
with Carding,with Finished
AppalachianThread, ClothClothing 1840-1860
Counties ofFactories OnlyFactories % Change
______
Alabama 4.94 3.19 + 21.8%
Georgia 2.40 1.17 + 43.2%
Kentucky 3.23 2.50 + 90.1%
Maryland na 0.11 - 85.9%
North Carolina 4.62 3.15 + 47.4%
South Carolina na na + 28.5%
Tennessee 3.79 2.42 - 27.5%
Virginia 1.84 1.12 - 57.3%
West Virginia 1.49 1.04 - 29.7%
Region 2.82 1.57 + 6.7%
______
Sources: Calculated using Appalachian county totals in U.S. Census Office, Compendium of 1840, U.S. Census Office, Population in 1860, and U.S. Census Office, Manufactures in 1860. Finished clothing are clothing, gloves, mittens hats, and caps produced in factories or in small artisan shops. Home manufactures are the value of textiles marketed by free households; slave outputs and sales were not counted. The antebellum censuses were taken and enumerated by dwelling or building, so artisans producing textiles in their own households were not counted among the commercial artisan shops.
This is a copyrighted document from the electronic archive for Wilma A. Dunaway, Southern Laboring Women: The Gendered Boundaries of Race, Ethnicity, and Class in Antebellum Appalachia, 1700-1860, Virginia Tech Library.
Table 37
Textiles Production by White Appalachian Women as Represented in Oral Histories
______
% women who engaged in this form of textiles production
Flax Wool Sewed
Processing Carding Spinning Weaving Knitting Clothing Quilting
______
Poor Women (n = 290) 50.3 100.0 100.0 50.3 80.3 100.0 100.0
Middle-Class
Women (n = 258) 9.7 9.7 100.0 100.0 25.6
Wealthy Women (n = 31) 48.4 38.7
Only Supervised Slaves or
Servants to Do Tasks
Middle-Class Women 50.0 50.0 74.8 74.8 24.8
Wealthy Women 74.2 74.2 74.2 74.2 51.6 61.3 100.0
All Women (n = 579) 42.6 86.3 86.3 42.6 83.3 100.0 88.7
______
Sources: Analysis of 109 transcripts from the Appalachian Oral History Project and 470 transcripts from the Tennessee Civil War Veterans Questionnaires.
This is a copyrighted document from the electronic archive for Wilma A. Dunaway, Southern Laboring Women: The Gendered Boundaries of Race, Ethnicity, and Class in Antebellum Appalachia, 1700-1860, Virginia Tech Library.
Table 38
Farm Women=s Household Contributions to the Economy, 1860
Part A. Value of Economic Sectors
______
$ Value$ Value $ Value
Women=sManufacturing Agricultural
Appalachian Householdand Industrial Crops and
Counties ofOutputsCommodities Livestock
______
Alabama 895,721 1,517,850 6,760,407
Georgia 762,207 1,043,997 4,126,924
Kentucky1,332,828 2,049,084 6,291,810
Maryland 160,736 5,830,589 2,265,097
North Carolina 808,151 641,202 4,705,450
South Carolina 70,644 36,085 336,675
Tennessee1,823,810 5,664,644 13,599,710
Virginia1,684,673 8,947,721 8,800,853
West Virginia1,881,310 8,948,751 3,059,869
Region9,420,08034,679,923 49,946,795
______
Part B. Per Capita Economic Outputs
______
$ Women=s
Output per
AppalachianFarm 1.00 Women=s Outputs to Every:
Counties ofHousehold$ Manufacturing $ Agricultural
______
Alabama66.10 1.70 7.55
Georgia68.39 1.37 5.42
Kentucky75.57 1.54 4.72
Maryland34.50 36.27 4.10
North Carolina66.02 0.79 5.82
South Carolina54.30 0.51 4.77
Tennessee66.75 3.11 7.46
Virginia 62.03 5.31 5.22
West Virginia66.22 4.76 1.63
Region62.91 3.68 5.30
United States47.12 40.06 NA
______
Sources: Women=s outputs aggregated from county totals in U.S. Census Office, Agriculture in 1860 for butter, cheese, beeswax, orchard products, home manufactures, and market produce. Since the 1860 census did not report poultry or ginseng, I utilized the 1840 aggregated values reported in U.S. Census, Compendium for 1840 and converted those values to 1860 dollars using the ratio in David and Solar, AHistory,@ pp. 16-17. Manufacturing aggregated from county totals in U.S. Census Office, Manufacturing in 1860. Agricultural values from Dunaway, AIncorporation,@ Table 9.19, p. 1130. Commodity prices for butter, beeswax, and cheese were obtained from Cole, Commodity Prices. Per capita estimates were calculated using population totals in U.S. Census Office, Population in 1860.
This is a copyrighted document from the electronic archive for Wilma A. Dunaway, Southern Laboring Women: The Gendered Boundaries of Race, Ethnicity, and Class in Antebellum Appalachia, 1700-1860, Virginia Tech Library.
Table 39
Farm Women=s Outputs as a Percentage of Household Income, 1860
______
% AllAverage Women=s Outputs
House-HouseholdAvg. $ % Hshld.
Farm TenureholdsIncomeValue Income
______
Tenants/Sharecroppers26.1 $57 42.80 75.1
Small Farm Owner38.2 $563104.09 18.5
Middling Farm Owner28.2$1,761 38.20 2.2
Large Farm Owner 7.5$4,350 13.05 0.3
______
Source: Household income and farm data drawn from Dunaway, First American Frontier, pp. 79 and Dunaway, AIncorporation,@ p. 1107. Average value of women=s outputs derived from analysis of a systematic probability sample of 3,474 farm households drawn from the enumerator manuscripts of the 1860 Census of Agriculture. For methods, see website. Small farm owners held less than 100 acres and no slaves.
This is a copyrighted document from the electronic archive for Wilma A. Dunaway, Southern Laboring Women: The Gendered Boundaries of Race, Ethnicity, and Class in Antebellum Appalachia, 1700-1860, Virginia Tech Library.
Table 40
Women=s Work by Household Types
______
Percentage of Households in which Women Did This Type of Labor
Impoverished Households Middle-Class Households Wealthy Households
Small Slave- Business Business
Type of Landless Farm Town Farm Holding or Profes- Slave- or Profes-
Labor Farm Owner Lbr. Owner Farm sional holder sional
______
Farm or business
management * * * * * * * *
Field labor 100 100 25
Tending livestock 100 100 25
Milking cows 100 100 25
Family garden 100 100 50 100 100 40 33 20
Selling produce 100 100 10 50 50
Selling milk,
butter, cheese 50 75 75
Selling crafts 100 100 25 100 100
Boarders 50 33 65 25 33 33
Housework only 70 100 100 100 100
______
Source: Analysis of 470 questionnaire responses from Appalachian counties in Tennessee Civil War Veterans Questionnaires. Only eleven of the Appalachian veterans supplied no information about their mothers= work. An asterik [*] indicates that women did this work only after illnesses or deaths of their husbands or when the household had a female head.
This is a copyrighted document from the electronic archive for Wilma A. Dunaway, Southern Laboring Women: The Gendered Boundaries of Race, Ethnicity, and Class in Antebellum Appalachia, 1700-1860, Virginia Tech Library.