Trace that notion back to eighteenth-century America, and you will find that many of those principles transcend time and space. Europe was an ever-changing nucleus of fashion during the period, with the latest trends coming out of London, Paris, and Milan. Across the sea, Britain’s colonies still relied on material imports from European fashion hubs to keep up with relevant trends.
Throughout the 18th and 19th centuries, hetchels were essential tools used to separate the fibrous strands of the flax plant. Once groomed, these strands were spun into linen filaments on a spinning wheel, becoming the threads used to craft cloth items such as stockings, dresses, bedding, and shirts. Hetchels and other spinning implements allowed women to craft clothing in their homes on their terms (Earle, 1992, p. 167).
As an abundant plant in the colonial landscape, farmers cultivated flax from North to South, making it readily available and ideal for the homestead. While Americans produced goods for exportation, the market, and the home, the importance of local linens reached a pinnacle following the Sugar and Townshend Acts of 1764 and 1767. These decrees, levied by British ministers, taxed the colonies on critical necessities, including china, sugar, paper, and lead. Rising tensions and mercantile pressures compelled Americans to respond by boycotting British commodities and producing local items such as fabric and tea (Raphael, 2016, p. 39).
While male administrators carried the non-importation movement to assemblies, women spearheaded cloth boycotts at home, helping to reduce economic dependence on British commodities. Some women wore their homespun garments as proud statements against British taxation, while groups in Rhode Island and New Hampshire refused to drink tea, substituting their regular indulgences with coffee (Norton, 1996, p. 159). These seemingly simple acts created significant societal change as Americans became less reliant on British imports for survival.
Boycotting allowed women to become instrumental in civic affairs, blending domestic duties with resistance. The significance of female cooperation in America’s dissent compelled men to reconsider the role women would play as the struggle for freedom progressed (Norton, 1996, p. 159). By refusing to consume or wear British products, women, bans, and local products became driving forces of colonial transformation. Such potent non-consumption agreements marked some of the first moments in American history where women could enact substantial political change.
Artifacts like the hetchel remind us of the statements made by American women in the struggle to free the colonies from British tyranny. This tool recalls how, by uniting their public and household obligations, women changed the accessibility of political protests while embodying the declaration of “No Taxation without Representation.” If Britain was going to tax America on critical items, the people would make their own goods, proving they could endure without British mercantilism.
The idea that boycotts and choices of clothing could contribute so significantly to politics was as influential in the 18th century as it is now. Ladies’ groups such as the Daughters of Liberty made significant headway by refusing British policies and proclaiming their sentiments through homespun textiles. This combination of politics, identities, and principles allowed women to transform conventional ideas while establishing themselves in the spaces, structures, and threads of our independent nation.
Bibliography
Earle, Alice Morse. Home Life in Colonial Days. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 1992.
Norton, Mary Beth. Liberty’s Daughters: The Revolutionary Experience of American Women, 1750-1800. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1996.
Raphael. Ray. A People’s History of the American Revolution. New York: The New Press, 2016.
