IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/ehsrev/v78y2025i1p179-206.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Nominal wage patterns, monopsony, and labour market power in early modern England

Author

Listed:
  • Meredith M. Paker
  • Judy Z. Stephenson
  • Patrick Wallis

Abstract

Records of long‐eighteenth‐century English wage rates exhibit almost absolute nominal rigidity over many decades, alongside significant dispersion between the wages paid by different organizations for the same type of work in the same location. These features of preindustrial wages have been obscured by data aggregation and the construction of real wage series, which introduce variation. In this paper, we argue that the standard explanations for wage rigidity in economic history are insufficient. We show econometric evidence for monopsony power in one major organization and argue that the main historical wage series are also affected by employer power. Eighteenth‐century England had an imperfectly competitive labour market with large frictions. This gave large organizations the power to set wage policies. We discuss the implications for the eighteenth‐century British economy and research into long‐run wages more generally.

Suggested Citation

  • Meredith M. Paker & Judy Z. Stephenson & Patrick Wallis, 2025. "Nominal wage patterns, monopsony, and labour market power in early modern England," Economic History Review, Economic History Society, vol. 78(1), pages 179-206, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:ehsrev:v:78:y:2025:i:1:p:179-206
    DOI: 10.1111/ehr.13346
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/ehr.13346
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/ehr.13346?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:ehsrev:v:78:y:2025:i:1:p:179-206. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ehsukea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.