Skip to content

Chapter 02 · 1600–1760

The Colonial Hearth

Spinning the First Threads of a Nation

In the early colonies, textile production was a matter of survival. The hearth was the center of the industrial world, and every household a producer—turning fields of flax and flocks of sheep into the shirts, sheets, and blankets of a fragile new society.

Jump to classroom kit
Spinning in the colonial American kitchen, where nearly all household cloth began.
Spinning in the colonial American kitchen, where nearly all household cloth began.Engraving from Joel Dorman Steele and Esther Baker Steele, "A Brief History of the United States" (1885). Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons.

English and Dutch settlers arrived with sheep, flax seed, and the embodied knowledge of village craft. Production was localized, manual, and deeply seasonal. Carding, spinning, and weaving were daily chores braided into cooking, dairying, and childcare. Colonial governments alternately encouraged and commanded this work: when English supplies faltered in the 1640s, the Massachusetts General Court urged towns to multiply their sheep, and in 1656 it assessed every family a quota of spinning. Britain's mercantilist policy, by contrast, sought to keep the colonies as buyers rather than makers of cloth. The Wool Act of 1699 did not forbid colonists to weave, but it barred them from shipping woolen goods out of any colony, even to a neighboring one. This tension—between domestic self-sufficiency and imperial dependence—planted political seeds that would flower in the 1760s and established the 'homespun' tradition that later became a weapon of protest.

Inside this chapter

Classroom Kit

Was colonial cloth-making a private household chore or a public duty controlled by government?

Primary source

Order of the Massachusetts General Court on Spinning

Massachusetts General Court, 1655

That all hands not necessarily imployed on other occasions, as Women, Girls and Boyes, shall and hereby are enjoyned to Spin according to their skill and ability; and that the Select men in every Town do consider the condition and capacity of every family, and accordingly do assess them at one or more Spinners; ... And every one thus aforesaid, for a whole Spinner, shall for time to come, Spin every Year for thirty Weeks, three pound a Week of Linnen, Cotton or Woollen, and so proportionably for half and quarter Spinners, under the penalty of twelve pence a pound short.

Context: Facing a shortage of imported English cloth, the Massachusetts Bay colony's legislature turned household spinning into a legal obligation enforced by town officials. The order shows that the "homespun" economy was organized and policed by government, and that it depended on the labor of women and children.

Source: Labor and Trade in Colonial America (Beyond the Textbook). TeachingHistory.org, Roy Rosenzweig Center for History and New Media. 1655

Primary source

The Wool Act

Parliament of England (10 & 11 William III, c. 10), 1699

Whereas great quantities of the like manufactures have of late been made, and are daily increasing in the kingdom of Ireland, and in the English plantations in America, and are exported from thence to foreign markets, heretofore supplied from England ... be it further enacted ... no wool, woolfells, shortlings, mortlings, woolflocks, worsted, bay, or woollen yarn, cloth, serge, bays, kerseys, says, friezes, druggets, cloth-serges, shalloons, or any other drapery stuffs, or woollen manufactures whatsoever, made or mixed with wool or woolflocks, being the product or manufacture of any of the English plantations in America, shall be loaden or laid on board in any ship or vessel, in any place or parts within any of the said English plantations, upon any pretence whatsoever.

Context: Parliament passed the Wool Act to protect England's woolen industry, its largest export, from colonial competition. The law did not ban colonists from making cloth for themselves, but it barred them from exporting it, a core example of mercantilist trade policy.

Source: Colonial Trade Laws (Legal Studies 261 open text). University of Wisconsin-Madison. 1699

Discussion questions

  1. What did the 1655 Massachusetts order require a "whole Spinner" to produce each year, and who decided how many spinners each family owed?
  2. Who wrote each of these laws, and whose economic interests was each written to protect?
  3. The Massachusetts order pushed colonists to make more cloth; the 1699 Wool Act forbade them from shipping it. How might a colonial family in 1700 have experienced both laws at once?
  4. Governments today still use laws to encourage or restrict domestic manufacturing, such as tariffs and "Buy American" rules. Is it fair for a government to tell households or businesses what to produce or where they can sell it? Use both documents to support your argument.

Key terms

Homespun
Cloth spun and woven at home rather than bought from a merchant or factory.
Mercantilism
An economic system in which a nation controls trade with its colonies so that the home country gains the most wealth.
Selectmen
Elected officials who ran the day-to-day business of a New England town.
Fulling
Beating and washing woven wool so the fibers shrink and lock together into a thicker, stronger cloth.
Flax
A plant whose stem fibers are spun into linen thread; one of the most common fibers grown on colonial farms.

Sources

  1. ScholarshipSusan M. Ouellette. All Hands Are Enjoined to Spin: Textile Production in Seventeenth-Century Massachusetts. University of Massachusetts Amherst (doctoral dissertation), 1996.
  2. Primary sourceWool Act 1698 (10 Will. III c. 16), section XIX. legislation.gov.uk (The National Archives, UK).
  3. ScholarshipPrimary Sources: British Regulation of Colonial Manufacturing. American Legal History to the 1860s (University of Wisconsin).
  4. ScholarshipThe Jewel Mill and Stone Arch Bridge. Historic Ipswich, 2023.

Cite this page (Chicago)