The Eighteenth Century

British Civilisation: Economic and social change in Britain 1750-1850
The Eighteenth Century

General introduction: some food for thought................................................................................... ....3
ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL SITUATION IN BRITAIN
IN THE 1740s & 1750s ................................................................................................................. ........4
I. Content and Prosperity or Defoe’s England.................................................................. .....................4
II. Trade................................................................................................................... .............................4
A. Internal trade.................................................................................................... ............................4
B. Overseas trade...................................................................................................................... ........6
III. Financial and banking system.................................................................................................... ......8
A. Financial system................................................................................................................... .........8
B. Banking system...................................................................................................................... .......8
IV. Agriculture........................................................................................................................ ...............8
A. Before 1750 ............................................................................................................................... ...9
V. Industry:............................................................................................................ .............................11
A. Coal mining:............................................................................................................ ....................11
B. Iron........................................................................................................................................ ......11
C. Other manufactured goods............................................................................ .............................12
1. The social hierarchy of industrial classes.................................................... .............................14
2. General conclusion....................................................................................................... ............14
THE POPULATION AND SOCIETY – THE SPIRIT OF THE AGE............................................... .................16
I. The population – demography....................................................................................... ..................16
II. Society – rural society, urban society.................................................................... .........................16
III. Freedom and culture............................................................................................................... .......17
Annex................................................................................................................................ ................19
I. Historians & Writers:.................................................................................................................... ....19
A. Daniel Defoe (1660-1731):........................................................................................ ..................19
B. Christopher Alan Bayly (19**-20**):........................................................................ ....................19
C. G.M. Trevelyan (1876-1962):.................................................................................... ...................19
D. J.H. Plumb:.................................................................................................... ..............................20
E. Overton:................................................................................................................ ......................20
F. Lord Engle................................................................................................................... .................20
II. Inventors............................................................................................................... .........................20
A. Arthur Young (1741-1820):......................................................................................... .................20
B. Lord Ernle (1851-1937):................................................................................ ..............................21
C. Jethro Tull (1674-1741):.................................................................................................... ...........21
D. Lord Charles Townshend (1674-1738):....................................................................... .................22
E. Thomas William Coke (1754-1842):.................................................................................. ...........22
F. Collings Brothers:............................................................................................................ .............22
G. Denis Papin (1647-1712):........................................................................................................ ....23
H. Thomas Savery (1650-1715):.......................................................................................... ............23
Mr. Darribehaude 2007/2008 1

British Civilisation: The Eighteenth Century
I. Thomas Newcomen (1663-1729):............................................................................................ .....24

III. Historical Figures.................................................................................................. .........................24
A. George II (1683-1760:......................................................................................... ........................24
B. Oliver Cromwell (1599 – 1658):.................................................................................... ...............25
C. Abraham Darby (1678-1717):...................................................................... ...............................26
D. John Wesley (1703-1791):......................................................................................... ..................26
Mr. Darribehaude Semester 3 2

General introduction: some food for thought

In British history, the years between the 1760's and 1830 are considered as crucial years of
the Industrial Revolution. (Concerning the events in the 18th and 19th centuries, the expression
Industrial Revolution must be written with capital initials.) This expression is misleading because
there have always been industrial transformations: it has been a continuing process throughout
history. (For instance, the invention of the wheel was one industrial revolution.)
In the 18th century, it is true that, roughly from the 2 nd half onwards, there was a striking increase in
the speed of technical development. It offered the country new opportunities and miseries as it had
never known before, and that happened only in Britain. Later, in the late 18 th and early 19th centuries
(during the wars with Napoleon, called the Napoleonic wars), England applied sweeping changes to
industry and farming. England and Scotland set up the machinery that would later enable Britain to
become "the workshop of the world" by the 1850's.
A lot of myths surrounded the Industrial Revolution. It is true that type of Industrial Revolution that
started in Britain was to transform the whole world from many points of view (e.g. landscapes, types
of society, mentalities…). This coincided with the history of Britain alone. These transformations
concerning only Britain at first gave her influence and power over the whole world, and this ensured
the domination of an Anglo-Saxon vision of the world, of trade, of economics, of power and of Anglo-
Saxon values up to the present day. Today's global dominance by the USA, which is itself a country
settled by Anglo-Saxons, is simply the continuation of this situation. (Today, the two main countries
in the alliance in Iraq are Britain and the USA.) The seeds of what is called the Anglo-sphere today
were planted in Britain in the 18th and 19th centuries.
We can now realize that we are paying a terrible price as a result of technical change which was first
applied in the North of England in the 18th and 19th centuries. The pioneer role deeply marked the
country and had caused much damage from the environmental point of view. Even if we can admire
Britain for what she achieved in these days, it has to be tempered now by an awareness that what
was for a long time considered as progress in fact started a chain of events leading t climate change,
global warming, the greenhouse effect and all their terrible and unpredictable consequences. The
pioneer role deeply marked the country. Another consequence is the damage done to the
environment by the new type of farming that appeared in the 18th century. It was the English who
invented farming of the productivist kind, with intensive methods. One of the most dramatic
consequences, not so long ago, was mad cow disease (=BSE). One possible question about it is: if
men had known all this, would they take taken these risks?
To return to Britain alone, the title of the course concerns Britain but we are very often dealing with
England alone, or with England and Scotland. Each nation in Britain had different characteristics and
a different history. The word Britain is therefore slightly misleading since the situation we will study is
mostly that of England and Scotland. Only by the 1850's could Wales be considered as participating
in the Industrial Revolution. As far as the 3rd semester is concerned, we must remember that Wales
and Scotland, except for Edinburgh and Glasgow, were background countries, not concerned with
industrial and agricultural change. They had their own problems. What happened in Britain must be
compared with what happened in other countries in the rest of Europe, because their industrial
revolutions generally represented a brief, temporary phase of their history. In Britain, the difference
is that she had a pioneering row, and this left a deep mark on the country for a long time, especially
socially, economically and politically. (For instance, in the 1960's and 1970's, Britain's economic
problems and relative economic decline were attributed to the persistence of methods and
structures inherited from the 19th century. Another example is the division between North and South
in the UK, which is also attributed to the 19 th century events.) Even today, there is still some
evidence of the scars left by the Industrial Revolution.
The consequence of all this is that one cannot claim to understand 20 th century or even 21st century
Britain, economically, socially, politically and culturally without knowledge of what happened in the
18th and 19th centuries. If one is not convinced of this, our study will also try to show that the working
class, or rather all of us, apart from the happy few at the top of today's society, are undergoing the
most brutal economic transformation the world has known since the Industrial Revolution. Very
striking parallels can be drawn between the situation of these days and today's situation (with
globalization for instance). We first need to study what the economic and social situation was in the
mid-18th century and this will be the first chapter of semester 3.

ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL SITUATION IN BRITAIN

IN THE 1740s & 1750s
I.Content
I.Content and Prosperity or Defoe’s England
These two words are the terms that define the situation in Britain in those days, and even earlier
what has been called "Defoe's England". The early 18th century is known as Defoe's England
because he died in 1731 and because, apart from novels (Robinson Crusoe, Moll Flanders…), he
published many books about his travels in the British Isles. These books contain many observations
about the situation in the country, and in those days there were very few such books. Therefore
historians heavily rely on his works. There are very few reliable primary sources. What Defoe usually
describes is a satisfied, happy and prosperous country. The same can be said about the 1740s and
50s. England also enjoyed a healthy national life. There was no separation between towns and the
country or between agriculture, industry and commerce. This was one harmonious single economic
system.
What could then cause disruption? Wars. But content and prosperity generally did not stop, even in
wartime, because there were good harvests and cheap food. Even in this early period, the expansion
in industry, agriculture and commerce meant that "society moved unconsciously towards
Industrial Revolution" (cf. historian Christopher Alan Bayly's book Imperial Meridian). More and
more profit and money were made in trade and it was frequently invested into the land by improving
landlords1 who also played a role in industry. Therefore there was a constant interplay between towns
and the country, which was fundamental to England's harmony and strength. Yet, it does not mean
everything was perfect. Society was not 100% stable. For example, politically, local elites were losing
power in favour of a national elite which operated through the control of Parliament, it centres the
power, more than ever before. The local elite cannot longer do what they want. Another example is
social conflicts (i.e. land right, control of market…) reflected in occasional food riots in the 1720s,
1730s and 1760s, with uprising lead by artisan who wanted to defends protected markets and trade
practices. There was also religious and political divisions, which we will study in chapter 2. But on the
whole, Defoe's England is always described as a united nation, thanks to its trade especially.
II.Trade
II.Trade
The population was mainly composed of peasant and craftsman. For peasants and craftsmen, the old
way of life still carried on as usual. But this does not mean there was no evolution, especially in
trade. Already in the mid-18th century, traders and middlemen were finding new markets for their
products. England started developing "a sophisticated marketing structure while regionalism
and provincialism in the home market were breaking down" (according to Bayly in Imperial
Meridian). In France, for a long time, economy was stuck in regionalism and provincialism. This was
the same in other continental countries. Why was this not the case in England? Various elements
explain the development of both internal and external trade in England's economy.
A.Internal trade
Middlemen2, whose number greatly increased in the mid-18th century, were the ones who were able
to link supply and demand in England more and more effectively across the countryside. This unified
the countryside, and it was to be further improved in the late 18th century by the use of boats and
roads. But, already in the 1740s and 1750s, the link between supply and demand was helped by a
considerable growth in coastal shipping3. This resulted in the production of items like Cheshire
cheese, corn and coal (= bulk goods) from Newcastle, which found their way onto the London
market, a huge market for internal trade.
The London market was greatly enlarged by its population growth and an increase in wealth due to
the expansion of foreign trade. One of Britain's advantages was that London was the largest of all
Western cities with 750,000 inhabitants (15% of the population of the country). At that time, London
was twice as big as Paris. The predominance of London had transformed agriculture in the South and
in the East, and commodities (= raw material such as food and fuel, i.e. mostly coal) flowed in from
everywhere. Regions like Scotland and Ireland transported many products to London on Rivers and
on the sea, more than on roads.
1
= Propriétaire terrien
2
Intermediary between a manufacturer and a consumer.
3
= Cabotage

Another difference with the continent was that London was not the only centre of trade in Britain. By
the mid-18th century, new centres were developing, especially on the Atlantic coast, thanks to trade
with America. Bristol, Glasgow and Liverpool were developing as great ports of the Atlantic coast.
They played a role in foreign trade and also developed much activity, which gave much vitality to the
hinterland4.
One of the other elements about England's internal trade was the total absence of internal barriers
or customs, contrary to the situation on the continent, and especially in France. The situation in
England at that time can be called "internal free trade", although this expression did not exist yet.
England, Wales and Scotland formed one single market for English traders. The British Isles were the
most considerable area in Europe for this kind of "internal free trade". Ireland was in a special
situation, since commerce there and from there was severely restricted. In spite of the Union Act with
Scotland in 1707, it was difficult for Scottish traders to sell their products in England. English traders
definitely dominated.
A regime of enterprise and improvement already existed in England. There was a general spirit of
adventure and entrepreneurship. This was opening new markets both at home and abroad because
of the absence of official obstacles and administrative hassles. Contrary to France, an overall spirit of
freedom reigned.
Another factor was that commercial goals were in the mind of most people, from the simplest
artisan5 to the moneyed man in the City (City with a capital C means London). This factor conditioned
everything else. Even people who had little or nothing to do with trade (i.e. Daniel Defoe) expressed
the idea that trade was "one of the glories of Britain", before industry and agriculture. At all levels,
from local markets in villages to great fairs in cities, commercial concerns dominated the minds of
producers in both cities and the countryside.
There was no official obstacle to trade, which was officially encouraged by the authorities (i.e. the
Royal Society and the Society for the encouragement of arts, manufactures and commerce). Trade
also got helped from the government and the Parliament.
Help from the State about internal trade can be seen in the way a major obstacle to trade was lifted.
What was this major brake (= curb, obstacle)? The state of the roads was abominable. The network
was very poor in the early and mid-18th century. Even Defoe described it and confirmed it was
insufficient and very bad. Therefore roads were expensive to use. Later, in the 2 nd half of the 18th
century, Arthur Young also described it. In the mid-18th century, at many times of the year, roads
were too soft for wagons and became mud. Others were paved but dated back from Roman time and
were too narrow. They were not repaired because there was no official authority for this. The users of
the roads did not pay for their upkeep since it was the responsibility of the parishes 6, both financially
and physically, to repair and maintain the roads. But people from the parishes were only expected to
do it 6 days a year without getting paid, and moreover they were not experts. They did not have the
necessary materials and were not even given the necessary tools, so nothing was done. There was
no control. On the whole, the best roads in the British Isles remained the Roman roads, just because
they were the only ones which were paved.
As a consequence, sacks7 of heavy materials (i.e. coal, corn, hardware…) were transported on the
sides of horses, because wheeled traffic would have broken or stuck in the mud. There were great
holes and ruts. It took 2 days to travel from Dover to London, while nowadays it only takes about 2
hours. It took 10 days from London to Edinburgh, whereas now it takes less than one day or even half
a day. Towards 1750, transporting one tonne of goods over 30 km could double the price. Therefore,
economically speaking, it could not go on; something had to be done.
This situation had to change for economic progress and commercial development. The solution was a
system of turnpikes8. It was a national policy since it was created and enforced through Acts of
Parliament. At first it was on a small scale, concerning only the worst sections of some roads, but for
the first time the idea as to make the users of the roads pay for their upkeep and repairs. To run
these turnpikes, turnpike trusts were established. This solution meant that England was already
4
The surrounding areas
5
Craftsmen, farmers…
6
= paroisses
7
Bags
8
Toll gates / toll bars

applying a policy of private initiative. Between nationalization or privatization, between the State and
the private sector, England had already chosen private initiative two centuries before Thatcher or
Blair. Turnpike trusts were in private hands although they were created by Parliament. They were
given powers to build gates and toll bars 9, and in return had to guarantee repairs or constructions in
a certain area or along a certain highway.
Between 1700 and 1750, some 400 Road Acts were passed in Parliament. Yet, it meant that only 10
turnpikes a year were founded until 1750. By 1748, there were only 160 of them. These figures stand
in contrast with those of later years. Indeed, between 1750 and 1790, 1600 Road Acts were passed.
Over 530 trusts had been established by 1770. Therefore there was a considerable development in
their number. Most cities were linked thanks to it, but the process took rather a long time. This is the
reason why, until the 2nd half of the 18th century, river traffic was very important to transport food,
fuel, timber, etc. The main rivers were the Thames, the Trent, the Mersey, the Severn, the Avon.
Some parts of them had been deepened and locks 10 had been built in the early 18th century. The role
of river navigation would be complemented by canals.
B.Overseas trade
External11 trade was developing to such an extent that it was perhaps even greater than internal
trade. This is due to England's expanding empire and colonies. In the early 18th century, England
was expanding along the Atlantic coast in North America, in the Caribbean (especially in Jamaica)
and in the West Indies. Commerce exploitation of these places had started in the West Indies before
America, but England had nothing in Africa or in India yet. West Indies were important because sugar
cane were produced there (sugar, Rhum and molasses). When England loose Northern America, it
turns its attention to India, Asia and Australia  the West Indies lost their importance.
One of the reasons for the expansion of foreign trade was Mercantilism, i.e. the Mercantile system. It
had prevailed since the Tudors in the 15th century. This system had been reinforced by a series of
Navigation Acts since the first one had been passed in 1651, 1660 and 1663. This system officially
existed until 1849. One of its most important aspects was that all goods had to be transported
exclusively onboard English ships, with English crews, and re-exported via English ports. Therefore
this can be called protectionism. Indeed, this was a means of protecting England's trade and
economy. It was a form of economic nationalism. This system instituted the monopoly of English
commerce in England, protectionist tariffs, and an active role for the state as a consequence of this
(= State intervention). England therefore developed private sector through the turnpike system as
well as State intervention through Mercantilism and Navigation Acts.
The 17th century had seen a "commercial revolution" because of Mercantilism. In the 18th century,
the Navigation Acts firmly established for the English the infamous triangular commerce. This
consisted in ships leaving the British Isles, sailing to Africa loaded with cheap goods to be exchanged
for slaves, who were transported and sold to the West Indies (Jamaica and other smaller islands
known as the Sugar Islands). The ships returned to England loaded with sugar, rum, spices, etc.
Yet, Britain was not alone in this triangular trade. Her rivals were the Dutch, the French, the Spanish,
the Portuguese (Spain and Portugal had started this system). In France, the most famous harbours
for triangular trade were Bordeaux and Nantes. In Britain they were Bristol and Liverpool. Britain was
one of the most eager and aggressive promoters of this trade. She even sold slaves to Spanish
colonies in central and South America, after she had gained a monopoly in 1713 by signing the
Asiento12 with the then declining Spanish Empire. (In 1713, Spain and Britain also signed the Utrecht
Treaty, which has justified British presence in Gibraltar ever since.)
Especially the slave trade was very lucrative. Fortunes were made in Bristol and Liverpool thanks to
that trade. Therefore Britain belonged to the European economy and to the worldwide economy of
European maritime states.
England's commercial network extended all over the world. First, in Europe, it extended to Northern
Europe and the Mediterranean. In what was called the New World, i.e. the Northern American
continent, she had a monopoly over her colonies as well as in the West Indies thanks to the imperial
system. For a long time, the West Indies were economically more important than the North American
colonies. The network also extended to Africa, but there were no colonies there yet, only trading
9
= barrières de péage
10
= écluses
11
Foreign
12
= contrat

posts. This was the same in India and in the Far East: there were only trading posts and what the
British called at that time "factories", (i.e. warehouses13).
In Britain itself, there were many sea ports. Britain's monopoly in colonial trade was ensured by the
Navigation Acts. The prosperity of the sea ports was often based on slave trade. There were also
shipwrights, which meant that ship owners participated in navigation and transport of goods
between Africa and the colonies. They imported sugar, molasses and rum from the West Indies to
Europe, and all these goods were produced thanks to slaves. Later, tobacco (from Virginia) and
cotton was also imported from America to England.
Around 1750, 100,000 British slaves were onboard some 6,000 ships. A huge number of people were
employed in both internal and external trade (clerks, accountants14, stevedores15, etc). Masses of
goods flowed to and from the colonies. The colonies too had to buy what they needed to England and
were prohibited from buying to other countries. Among other goods imported to England were tea
and coffee, for which the English were acquiring a taste.
For all these reasons, according to Bayly in Imperial Meridian, "English people came to consider
themselves as denizens16 of a consumer society, and national taste started to extend
beyond items of clothing and food to luxuries such as tea and coffee and services such as
commercial horseracing, theatre and concerts". The expression "consumer society" did not
exist at that time but can now be applied to that period.
By the 18th century, England had already become "a nation of shopkeepers", which was originally an
insult by Napoleon. The merchants were characteristic figures of that period and commercial aims
and preoccupations were on everyone's minds. Foreign trade was just more lucrative than internal
trade, but the authorities and the government were firm defenders of external trade too. How did the
government help foreign trade? The government was always willing, and even eager, to conquer
markets. In those days, it could be done by the military solution or by colonization. Foreign policy
was dominated by these economical aims, in England at least. (On the contrary, France wanted to
acquire new land by colonizing, but not necessarily for trade.) Therefore, Britain's war aims were
usually purely commercial too. This was certainly influenced by the presence in London of lobbies
(already at that time): industrialists17 lobbies, traders' lobbies and financers' lobbies. They often
urged the government into finding new markets, just as today's lobbies do. Once a market was
conquered, the English could dominate local competition (this was what happened in India in the late
18th century for example). As a whole, this behaviour was to lead to Britain's worldwide quasi-
monopoly.
Another way of helping external trade was by signing treaties, which Britain often did, for instance
with Russia. The government also ensured that the Royal Navy was always kept in a high state of
readiness to deploy overseas wherever it was necessary and defend Britain's interests on the seas all
over the world. All traders enjoyed a great, if not complete, autonomy. They were officially
encouraged by the Board of Trade (= today's Minister of Trade). A good fiscal system also
encouraged trade, which meant low taxes. Indeed, Britain believed that what was good for the
merchant was good for the monarch as well.
England's perception of trade was different from other countries'. She considered low taxes on
masses of products better than high taxes of very few goods (which few people would thus have
been able to buy).
Finally, foreigners who studied the situation in England or simply visited the country all admired both
Britain's internal and external trade and the freedom enjoyed by merchants. They saw this
commercial freedom as having pervaded18 the whole of English society, they saw it as having
resulted in greater political freedom and as the symbol of a healthy society. Voltaire often had to
escape to England and live there as an exile because of his problems with the French monarchy,
therefore he had a chance to observe the interplay between commercial freedom and political liberty.
He wrote about it, and exclaimed in Lettres philosophiques (1734): "Le commerce, qui a enrichi
les citoyens en Angleterre, a contribué à les rendre libres, et cette liberté a étendu le
commerce à son tour [= cercle vertueux]; de là s'est transformée la grandeur de l'Etat."
Another philosopher who wrote about England was Montesquieu, but it was later.
13
= entrepôts
14
= comptables
15
= dockers
16
= habitants, membres
17
= industriels, N
18
= se diffuser sur, proliférer dans

* TRANSITION *
The development of both internal and external trade represented a huge accumulation of capital19.
Both individuals and companies needed to conduct business through banks and through a financial
system in order to be able to make investments and obtain loans. In the case of chartered
companies, huge fleets of ships were involved. They belonged for example to the East India company
(a chartered company), which also had to maintain trading posts, pay their staffs at home and
abroad, the ships' crews and their own armies in several colonies. For instance, they provided
weapons and guns, doctors, etc. A royal charter was given by the King to the chartered companies,
which was a permission for them to colonize and exploit an overseas territory. For example, Virginia
and Pennsylvania were founded under a chartered company. The company had a monopoly over the
territory and managed it on the King's name.
III.Financial
III.Financial and banking system
An important financial and banking system already existed in Britain in the 18th century.
A.Financial system
It had some notable characteristics, such as the existence of joint-stock companies20. These
companies enabled the big aristocratic landlords to meet and work with financiers in London because
they all belonged to the Board of Directors21 of these companies. Not all landlords wanted to engage
in trade, but these boards meant that they could work, in their own interest and also for the benefit
of the country's economy, with the businessmen of London. Landlords who had wealth and political
power could work together with people who had a business experience. In London, the City was
already a big financial centre.
B.Banking system
Banks had been founded not only in London, but also in provincial towns and in most major cities
and ports. Banks were important for investors, who could thus get loans and borrow money to invest
it. Would-be investors could therefore find money in a relatively easy way, which in an important
factor to explain the future Industrial Revolution. However, too much had been made of the banking
system by some historians: there were problems too about it. Many banks were too small (the
business of one man or one family), many went bankrupt (= there were bankruptcies), there were
frauds, etc. Many would-be investors in fact did not resort to banks but to self-financing instead. So
the role of banks in the economy has to be put and kept into perspective.
What remains true is that, thanks to the financial system, England was able to resist enemies
(especially France) and to support and finance its allies (especially in the Napoleonic wars). The
financial system, thanks to domestic and foreign trade, kept improving.
IV.Agriculture
IV.Agriculture
"The change between 1700 and 1800 was astonishing. England not only produced food
for a population that had doubled itself as well as grain for treble [= three times] the
number of horses, but, during the first part of the period [the 18 th century], became the
granary of Europe." (Cf. Lord Ernle, a historian, in English farming, past and present and also on
http://www.soilandhealth.org/01aglibrary/010136ernle/010136ch7.htm) Yet, this view is challenged
by other historians.
What is also remarkable is that, already around 1750, agriculture no longer dominated the economy,
contrary to other economies in other countries. This is a paradox. By 1780, agriculture accounted for
only 30% of the national income. By the end of the 18th century, agriculture employed only 1/3 of
the working population, as opposed to 70 to 80% at the beginning. These figures need explaining. At
the same time, over 75% of the total population still lived in the countryside. Agriculture was still
vital for three reasons:
•In 1750, only two cities (London and Edinburgh) had over 50,000 inhabitants.
19
= capitaux
20
= sociétés par actions
21
= conseil d'administration

•Agriculture was still the indispensable basis for other activities, especially for trade,
because agriculture was the only permanent source of food. Indeed, food imports could not be
regular at that time, and they could not be cheap enough. This situation lasted until the 1870s or
1880s. The reasons for it were wars, shipwrecks, the high cost of transport (especially in mainland
England), etc. As a result, British agriculture just had to feed the British population.
•Political and social life of the country, i.e. Parliament and the whole structure of society,
was dominated by land owners, landlords, aristocrats, or simply wealthy people who had bought land
and whose fortune and way of life depended, either totally or mostly, on agriculture. To belong to the
upper classes and enter politics, one needed to own land. Land ownership almost automatically gave
a seat in Parliament, and it was a matter of social prestige and political power. In Parliament itself,
small villages and rural counties had more weight than some large cities, because the situation in
Parliament had not changed since the Middle Ages. Until the 19th century, laws favouring landlords
and their interests were passed to the detriment of industrials and other activities. This situation did
not really change until 1832.
Another reason for the predominance of agriculture was that the elite's lifestyle (especially sports
and past times), opinions and philosophy were turned towards the countryside. Those who wanted to
enter the high society circles had to imitate them. This perpetuated the land-owning class and way
of life. Any change affecting the countryside was automatically reflected in political life, and
therefore affected as well the whole social structure itself.
The organization of the society in those days was the following:
•The monarch.
•A few hundred very rich aristocratic landlords such as dukes, i.e. high nobility.
•A larger number of members of the gentry, and especially squires. (High nobility and the
gentry owned half the land in England. A great part of the other half belonged to the monarch.)
•The land nobles and the gentry owned was usually leased out22 to some tens of thousands
of people known as farmers. (The word "farmers" in English at that time is very different from the
French word "fermiers": this was a very enviable position.) This system of leasing out the land is also
referred to as "landlord-tenant" system in history books.
•The farmers worked the land with the help of numerous labourers23, cottagers and servants.
Sometimes these people owned a very small patch (=plot) of land themselves, but only a few
cottagers and freeholders24 were able to survive and have their own lodgings.
One of the question in why? Social prestige, political power  not only.
Another reason as a social class many land lords were quite willing to devote both attention and
money to improving the land and method of cultivation. So did so out of curiosity in a spirit of
scientific discovery at any value at 1st, but when the other saw that a profit could be made this
became the main motivation.
What is interesting from that point of view is that the money acquired in financial system by land
lords was often reinvested in agriculture but also could be in industry or trade.
One of the cause of what is known as the agriculture revolution.
Usually agriculture is associated with archaic methods but in 18 th century England was society
already adapted to produce cheaper and better goods and another preoccupation was marketing and
selling on national and international scale.
The movement toward increasing fields movement of increasing productivism took one or two
other century to settle in the agricultural revolution has already started before 1750 and made
possible 1st to improve technique and commercial methods and secondly thank to legal measures.
A.Before 1750
On of the chief measure was known as the enclosure movement. This was a movement that allowed
the regrouping and concentration of land and historians tell us that the enclosure of land has been
going on since Tudor time (1485-1603) among this form there was:
22
= données à bail
23
= journaliers
24
= propriétaires fonciers sans obligations

• The enclosure of open fields into hedged fields to promote better individual farming,
•The enclosure of village commons (part of land common of all villagers  everyone can use
it)
•The enclosure of arable land for pasture especially for sheep.
One of the problem with open field was that lead to quarrel between neighbours, and also to
irregular farming.
Until of the 18th century a part of that form they had provoke little resentment and they were always
presented as a economic necessity or event in the early 18th century as a duty.
The population increase  they have to be fed but land were potentially the best were still
unenclosed and therefore cultivated with archaic practices of cultivation (e.g. fallowing land)
Fallowing land25 was the main method of cultivation.
The idea of agricultural improvement has been in the air since the Restoration (1660-1688.) With an
increasing number of books on better methods ands spirit of scientific progress.
Name associated with agricultural improvement:
•Jethro Tull
•Lord Townshend  known as Turnip Townshend
•Arthur Young
•Thomas Coke who found land in Norfolk and because he succeeded, he became Coke of
Norfolk.
•Collings Brothers
Their role is now disputed by serious historians who are not agree these men would be myth.
In the 1st half of the 18th century e.g. Jethro Tull bar have often been described as one of the 1st
scientific farmer and claims that he had invented two important tools:
•The seed drill
•The horse hoe
This in fact is a false claim in particular he didn’t invented the seed drill.
Lord Engle had opposite opinions: He considered them (Tull) as pioneers.
Overton: “despite the evidence, the myth associated with these individuals are proved
extremely different dislodge.”
It doesn’t mean most of them weren’t successful or admirable in what they achieved. From our point
of view, we must be careful and compare what historian wrote about them. Even if part of their
success is a myth, we must know what each of them did or tried to do.
Overton himself wrote: “There’s general agreement that their role has been exaggerated.”
But they did something anyway.
Some landlords, certainly not many at the beginning were on the lookout for new methods. Enclosure
was seen as an opportunity for experiment and change. They were encouraged by modern method
theorist and agricultural writers, collectively known as agriculturalists, who denounced ancient
methods and commons as economically harmful to everyone. Denounced open fields because they
accused this system of delaying the adoption of improvement, which (some) in fact had been known
since 17th century. E.g. old method of fallowing, different scientific rotation of crops; cultivation of
turnips and potatoes (since 17th century: known), use of silos, storage of water, proper feeding of
stock in winter, use of oil-cake26. Why weren’t these improvements used? Because it was a question
of routines (cf. all habits dies hard.)
When ideas of men like Tull appeared, much of the England land still belonged to the small squires
and other small owners (who weren’t interested or didn’t have the necessary capital.)  until 1740’s,
25
= jachère
26
= tourteau

al improvements (especially enclosure) had been enforced at a local level. E.g. only 67 enclosure
acts were voted form 1721 to 1740.
What happened in the 1740’s, considered by most as the benefits of the agricultural revolution, was
in a way what happened with turnpike post = acceleration. Became a national policy since it was to
be reinforced by a new procedure, with a new type of act of parliament to overcome the resistance of
individual owners. It was the will of the parliament with the benefit of hindsight, I can see that in
most cases, the way enclosure was carried out, was scandalous. The very big land owners controlled
parliament. Many small owners were cheated out of their best lands. They had to be content with the
little money or bad land that was given in compensation by corrupted parliamentary commissioners.
The decision of the commissioners couldn’t be challenged. The pace of enclosure increased with
each decade. Between 1741 and 1760, over 200 enclosure acts were voted. This movement
continued after 1760, until 1830’s and 1840’s and had serious social consequences. Hundred of
thousand of acres were to be enclosed, but some of the socio-economical consequences in the late
18th century. Another young= considered as a sincere agriculturalist.
 Agricultural industry explains why (cf. Trevelyan) “great compact estates cultivated by
tenants and landless labourers covered more and more of England at the expense of the
other forms of cultivation and ownership.” Agricultural revolution plus enclosure had one result
on the English landscape: the landscape that so many think is typical of the eternals England, with
its chessboard pattern, dates back to no further than 18th and 19th centuries
V.Industry:
V.Industry:
One of the goal is to show that, even before Industrial revolution, first regional specialization already
existed, and secondly the Industrial world in England wasn’t a desert (Industry was already
represented by different activities. E.g. coalmining, the iron industry, manufactured goods.) E.g.
millions of tons of cal were produces.
A.Coal mining:
This figure represented astronomical quantities for those days. The methods used were very simple,
even archaic. There were all sort of mining: iron, copper, tin, led, zinc. Coal was just one form of
mining, but it was already the typical activity in different areas; in and around Newcastle, Dunham,
in the county of Northumberland. It was already one major industrial section in counties like
Staffordshire an Leicestershire. From the point of view of technology, machines used in coal mining
had already been invented and machines depending on coal too. Denis Papin, inventor of steam
engine, had to flee from France because of his invention and died around 1712 in London.
In 1705, two very famous men in England (Thomas Savery and Thomas Newcomen) also invented
steam engine used for the first time in 1712. In the following years: was used to solve a very serious
problem in mines: pimping water out (problem of flooding.) This allowed mines, shafts, galleries to
be dug deeper and deeper.
In parallel with these technological advances, the demand for coal had been increasing since 17 th
century, not for industry but for domestic use (heating.) Coal had became the regular domestic fuel
in London for example and in all the regions to which it could be transported by water. In fact a
historian (J.H. Plumb), in a paperback England in the 18th century says: “The demand for coal was
too great in the early 18th century that it’s almost possible to peak of a coal rush.”
Apart from being used as fuel, coal was used in many industrial processes of manufacture. The great
demand that there was meant that shafts were sunk very deep, sometimes to 130 meters or more.
The demand also resulted in a great number of people and horses being employed. For example,
near Newcastle, to transport coal, over 20,000 horses were employed in the mines (this was before
the use of wagons became common). There was still a great amount of surface mining, as opposed
to shafts, and there were also many small businesses with only two or three minors, sometimes even
just one.
B.Iron
With regard to British iron, it had been considered as one of the best in Europe, if not the best, since
the 17th century. This industry had grown rapidly, especially in Birmingham and the area around it,
which was called the Black Country. One problem was that coal or coke fires were not yet applied.
Using coke is a process which greatly improves the quality of iron, and it had in fact been discovered

by Abraham Darby between 1709 and 1713, but it was not used in smelting works 27 until 1734 to
1750. Even then, coke was not in general use.
Compared with today's iron, 18th-century iron was not of excellent quality; it was expensive to
produce and transport because there was a real problem in iron transporting. In 1720, 50,000 tons
were produced, and even at the end of the 18th century only 100,000 tons were produced. So this
industry needed greater improvements.
The main markets for the iron industry were military needs (to make guns, cannons, cannon balls,
swords, etc.) and agriculture (to make tools, wheels, ploughs, horse shoes, etc.). It was not yet the
time for the famous Coal and Iron Revolution, which was to come especially after 1830 with the
development of railways and the Age of Coal and Iron.
C.Other manufactured goods

As for other manufactured goods, certain towns and counties had already specialized in certain
activities. For example, Sheffield was specialized in cutlery, Birmingham in light and small industries
and especially light metallurgy, and Staffordshire in potteries (the area was later called the Potteries
in the 19th century).
One needs to insist on one sector which was to be, during the Industrial Revolution, the leading
sector if taken as a whole: the textile industries. The major difference between the Industrial
Revolution and the years we are now considering (until the mid-18th century) is that wool dominated
this sector in the 18th century, whereas later it was cotton. The woollen cloth around 1750 was still
the chief item in home and foreign trade.
It was a long-time renowned sector, dating back to the Middle Ages. Many rivals had been eliminated
and it was still the greatest and by far the most widely diffused national industry in 1750. It was for
instance the favourite of Parliament, which had thus instituted a complex code of laws protecting and
encouraging it against the export of raw wool and the import of foreign cloth. Two thirds of English
exports consisted of cloth. Many other domestic laws and measures, not only in economy but also in
foreign policy, were aimed at promoting its manufacture and pushing its sales abroad. The utmost
was done to keep the great wool markets open. The markets for English wool were western Europe,
the Mediterranean, Russia, South America and the American colonies.
There were specialized centres which dated back to the Middle Ages, although wool was produced
almost everywhere in the country: East Anglia (around Norwich), the west and the south-west (in and
around Bristol), and Yorkshire (in and around Leeds, Bradford, Halifax and York). London was in itself
a great industrial centre, famous for its production of luxury goods. In textiles, silk was very luxurious
and was produced especially in Spitalfields, an area around London.
This was the situation around 1750. During later years of the 18th century, some of these sectors
were to thrive28 while others went through very difficult times, but in the end they survived and
developed while others declined irremediably and disappeared completely, especially when cotton
replaced and dominated everything else. With the exception of London, most of the centres
mentioned were not large towns at all. The bigger cities had more traditional British industries.
In those days, it was artificial to separate industry and rural or agricultural activities, even in the coal
and iron industries, because, in 1750 and even until the early 19th century, a large part of
manufacturing was a function of the country life. For long, industry was to remain rural and was
known as a "cottage industry"29, which was the most representative part of industry. Working in
factories was not very common yet, and this situation dated back to the Middle Ages.
Yet, what was new in the 18th century was that many artisans, i.e. cottage workers, had specialized
in one production or another (e.g. woollen cloth, cotton fabric, silk material, linen, carpet-making or
hosiery30). There was also specialization in other areas like metal goods or even coal mining.
Many of these workers were no longer independent or self-employed, but were becoming wage-
earners. In many villages, workers wove or knit on their frames, or traditionally went coal-mining
during their spare time or in the off-season, and these villages were becoming industrial villages
inhabited by skilled, and even highly skilled workers.
27
= fonderies
28
= prospérer
29
= travail artisanal à domicile
30
= bonneterie

So, even in the early 18th century, the situation was complex in industry and one should not
oversimplify the description of this situation. To understand the whole range of situations which then
existed, we can say that in some parts of England, especially in the woollen industry, independent
artisans travelled and sold themselves on the markets the goods they had produced: there was no
middleman. They produced goods with their family and/or labourers they employed. In other parts of
the country, merchants and middlemen travelled to villages to buy finished or semi-finished goods
from independent artisans. Yet, in other areas, especially in Yorkshire for wool and in Lancashire for
cotton, the goods were more and more often produced by semi-independent artisans. In some cases,
they might still own their workshops, frames or looms. But they were not totally independent
because they received the raw material from merchants and depended on them for their supplies.
This is called the putting-out system31, and this expression is still used today. This system had not
generalized to the whole country but it was developing.
There were other cases, especially in the south-west of England in the woollen industry, and also in
Yorkshire and Nottinghamshire among hosiers, where the wage-earners worked in premises32 with
tools that were owned by one big merchant employer or "manufacturer". He also provided the raw
material, so that the wage-earners totally depended on him. Sometimes, especially in the south-
west, they depended on him even for their homes.
At that time, the situation was quite different from the time when it was exclusively the villagers' and
cottagers' wives who spun and wove the raw material, produced by their own sheep, for their own
needs or possibly the needs of people living in the same village. This could still exist in some areas,
but such an archaic system could not prevail for long in the 18th century and its days were
practically over. Each village and region was gradually specializing in one type of manufacture, so
that, more and more often, self-sufficiency33 no longer applied and was no longer sustainable. All the
villages needed to import from other parts of England the goods they no longer produced. Workers
were too busy producing wool and had no time to produce their own food, so they had to import it,
and vice versa in other areas. This was one of the reasons for the development of internal trade as
well.
Most historians underline that the shift from self-sufficiency to a more modern structure was fairly
rapid. For instance, when George II acceded to the throne in 1727, the word "manufacturer" did not
describe a capitalist employer and owner of a factory but the hand worker himself in his small
workshop. Then, it came to describe the people who managed various workshops that could be
scattered over a wide area (these people were often merchant employers). This represented some
form of capitalist organization and supervision, but it was a far cry from the type of capitalist
concentration that was to appear in the rest of the 18th century and in the 19th century (the
development of factories, the concentration of the means of production and of the labour force).
Now let us focus on the obstacles to this type of capitalist concentration in the 18th century. During
the first part of the century, no technical invention really opened the way to that sort of
concentration. In fact, it was quite the opposite. The techniques used by a majority of workers went
against this evolution. For example, in the textile industry, the first modernized and "mechanized"
means of production were in fact small devices which should not even be called machines. They
could be used even in the smallest cottage. Another example were the metal industries. Coke had
been discovered but, despite this discovery, charcoal34 was still in use, and the problem with it was
that it could not be effectively transported because it was very brittle 35. So the smelting works36 that
used charcoal and the ironworks37 were small and scattered in forests and along streams.
These were obstacles to the sort of concentration that was to exist in the very late 18th century and
in the 19th century, when the Industrial Revolution started. The only forms of capitalist concentration
existing in industry in the mid-18th century were mainly commercial and financial, i.e. money was
concentrated in the hands of a few industrialists.
31
= sous-traitance
32
workshops, locaux
33
= auto-suffisance, autarcie
34
= charbon de bois
35
= friable
36
= fonderies
37
= forges

New processes, which were so important in the following years, had appeared before 1750, but at
the time, they were first shrouded in secrecy because any invention that could result in the loss of
jobs was rejected by artisans and craftsmen, or simply by angry workers. This was possible because
they were organized in powerful guilds which dated back to the Middle Ages, especially in old
industries such as the woollen industry.
Another obstacle to the development of inventions were protectionist measures against foreign
inventions.
We can now focus on the social structure in industry and industrial categories or classes. We must
notice that the word "class" was not used at that time with the same meaning as it has today. Wages
could be paid in cash, but there also existed the truck system38. Instead of being given money in
exchange for his labour, a worker was given some of the goods he had produced. So he had to sell
those goods himself if he wanted money. The problem was that the goods he was given were often of
poor quality, so they were difficult to sell. This system led to rioting.
This is why the social structure is so difficult to determine. Prices and wages varied from one region
to another. Women and children could be employed in their family workshops, under vastly different
conditions from one region and one family to another. A relatively large number of artisans also
worked on farms. One aristocratic landlord could own himself all the mines or all the ores in one
county.
1.The social hierarchy of industrial classes
At the top of it was the rich urban upper-class made up of merchants and middlemen.
Just below them were the master artisans or craftsmen, who lived either in town or in the
countryside. They belonged to what was called the "middling sort". (The expression "social class" did
not exist at that time, although the notion did, and words such as rank, situation or estate were used
to refer to one's class.) The members of this category were relatively independent, contrary to other
artisans depending entirely on merchants and what they called their masters.
Below them were the journeymen.
At the bottom were the young, i.e. the apprentices. Apprentices had to learn their trade for seven
years. Young children lived with a master and after seven years they could become themselves
artisans and set up in business.
The worst-off category was constituted by the minors. Most of them lived in the countryside. As new
technologies developed, pits were deeper and deeper, which involved that minors spent more and
more time underground and were more and more segregated from other Englishmen. They were
literally invisible and this is why it took so long to improve their lot. The first improvements only
came around the 1840s. There were more and more accidents and explosions, and very often, as in
other industries, women and children were employed as bearers to carry the coal in the galleries
with horses.
In the mining districts of Durham and Northumberland, minors formed combinations to protest about
their working conditions, but even if they were thousands, they were unable to better their
conditions. In Scotland, the situation was even worse as minors were in the same condition as
peasants in the Middle Ages, i.e. they were reduced to the condition of bondmen 39. This means that
they were legally obliged to work as minors for the duration of their lives and they belonged to their
employer.
Even before the heyday of capitalism, i.e. the 19th century, which is always described as the most
evil century in respect of the workers' condition, the living conditions of many workers were
deplorable. Another characteristic which already existed before the 19th century and which is often
described as typical of the 19th century was that the minors' employers had very little contact with
their employees. Within the coal-mining industry, there was a complete barrier between the
employer and the manual worker, which announced the situation in the late 18th century and in the
19th century.
2.General conclusion
By the 1750s, England and Britain had a large number of major assets40, among which could be
found a prosperous and thriving trade, in parallel with a growing colonial empire (which had very
38
= système de troc
39
= serfs

bright prospects and literally no limit to its growth), a powerful navy, improving marketing and
banking structures, an improving agriculture, commercially-minded elites, a large capital city, a
renowned woollen industry, etc.
On the other hand, if we concentrate on industry, workers were more and more specialized but a lot
of them were still employed in agriculture at the same time. In industry, this was a disadvantage
because it meant breaks in output according to the season, and also the fact that the goods
produced were of poor quality. From the point of view of efficiency, there were too many scattered
workshops in which whole families were employed, which caused a break on technical innovation
and industrial expansion. Another break was caused by the state of the roads and the poor
transportation network.
Yet the scattering of industries had one important advantage. Land owners, who belonged to the
agricultural world, also owned the mines on their estates and the workshops in the villages.
Therefore it was in their interest to invest money in the construction of railroads and canals, so that
the carriage of farm products and also coal and industrial goods could be made easier. But better
roads and new canals only appeared mostly after 1750. Until then, the economic situation, and
especially production under the domestic system, was only adapted to a rural society and a
relatively stagnant population.
40
= avantages

THE POPULATION AND SOCIETY – THE SPIRIT OF THE

AGE
I.The
I.The population – demography
Evidence concerning the population is unreliable. The first official census dates back to 1801. Even
births, marriages and deaths were not officially recorded at a national level until 1837. There were
only estimates.
Most estimates for England and Wales mention 6 or 6.5 million inhabitants between 1740 and 1750.
For England, Scotland, Wales and Ireland there were about 10.5 million inhabitants. The growth in
population had been slow between 1690 and the 1720s. After that, there was demographic
stagnation and even decrease until the 1740s. Afterwards, especially after 1760, there was a marked
increase in the population. We can then wonder if Industrial Revolution was the cause or the
consequence of this population growth, but this will be treated during the fourth semester.
This population was unevenly distributed. Large parts of the British Isles were practically deserted,
especially in Wales and Scotland.
II.Society
II.Society – rural society, urban society
The social system in Britain was not the same as on the continent. Especially since the 17th century,
it was wealth and not birth that differentiated social categories. In theory, Common Law did not
favour one social category more than another. The social hierarchy reflected the hierarchy of
incomes. Land ownership was considered to be more prestigious than simply money.
The society was predominantly rural and ruled by the aristocracy. The elite of aristocrats and
businessmen was more powerful than on the continent because it was not tightly controlled by the
sovereign. No one protested against its domination, whether in the British Isles or on the continent.
The elite was called their "betters" by the people who were below them in the social ladder. There
was no revolt against the social hierarchy, and obedience and deference as well as a sense of order
prevailed. At every level of society, people accepted patronage and nepotism.
This acceptance was a characteristic of England. Foreign visitors were always struck by it. It was
probably due in part to undeniable upward mobility. Quite a few people managed to climb up the
social ladder, even if they were of humble origins, Irish, a West Indian planter, or if they had made a
fortune in India for instance. Newcomers were absorbed by the elite and into the great families of the
land.
However, newcomers did not swamp the existing social and political establishment because they
were not numerous enough to really change the social structure. They were assimilated by older
institutions and professions1 thanks to the latter's control of Parliament and their intelligence and
ability to absorb newcomers. The upper-classes in Britain have always been known for their ability to
absorb newcomers, so there was no barrier between social classes. The social situation in England
explains why, by the 1750s and 1760s, there was a clear vision of the national interest among many
ranks of society. As for the old antagonisms between the landed classes and the moneyed classes,
they were forgotten and overridden by the national interest. The ruling classes in England were
varied but no cleavage really separated aristocracy and the bourgeoisie, both aware of their common
interests.
Yet, the domination of big land owners was maintained for a long time, i.e. until the 1830s at least or
even longer, and rural society was the basis of English society as a whole. This was due to prejudice
towards big land owners which accorded great importance to land owning, and it was also due to the
great importance of patronage (= protection of somebody in a lower social position by the upper
landed classes).
Over this rural world, in villages and parishes, two very important figures ruled: the squire and the
parson. They can be considered literally as "local sovereigns", especially in the north of England,
where the Industrial Revolution took place and developed. The squire had three functions:
•He was the local representative of the King.
•He was also the local Justice of Peace (=JP), i.e. the first local magistrate.
1
= professions libérales

•He represented the only form of local administration at the time.

Indeed, local administration in those days was left to the initiative of the squire. For instance, he was
in charge of maintaining roads, bridges and local sanitary services, he supervised almshouses and
workhouses (which were not actually places where poor people worked but where they had to live
and also work). Local administration was very chaotic and only depended on the seriousness of the
squire. There was no central administration and little control from London. The squire and the parson
also had a considerable moral influence as they could give encouragement, punishment, etc. Squires
literally controlled the lives of poor people.
On the other hand, there was an urban society made up of: essentially the "middling sort"
(shopkeepers, doctors, lawyers, clerks, artisans and craftsmen) and the mass of labouring classes
(including apprentices) with no stable employment, together with (at the top) upper merchants, or
"merchants princes", ship-owners, bankers and financiers.
But one should not contrast urban society with rural society because many people worked both in
industry and agriculture. As for members of the nobility, they spent their time in cities in the winter
but also on their estate in the countryside in the summer. They owned land both in urban centres
and in the countryside, therefore they were both members of the urban and the rural society.
Merchants belonged to the urban society, but bought estates in the countryside. More and more
often, especially in the textile industry, they controlled workers in the countryside. Their sons
married daughters from aristocratic families. But this interplay did not concern only classes at the
top of society. Among the labouring classes, there was a constant flow of people moving from the
countryside to the cities, especially when times got hard and living conditions were too bad in the
countryside for rural workers.
III.Freedom
III.Freedom and culture
Culturally speaking, there was little difference between dwellers and country people, whether it be at
the top and at the bottom of the social ladder. The manners of the elite resembled those of peasants
or those existing when the King was Henry VIII, especially table manners. English people still ate with
their fingers for example, which would have been unacceptable at the court of Louis XIV. The spirit of
the age was one of great intellectual and cultural excellence in England, which was also known as a
country of freedom.
Indeed, England was admired by foreigners (Voltaire, Montesquieu in his Esprit des Lois (1748), to
name but two) because of its institutions and civil liberties. English subjects supposedly enjoyed a
relative freedom. However, this idyllic view should be put into perspective and foreigners'
descriptions must be qualified by the term "supposedly". Common people and poor people were
despised and considered by the elite and the intellectuals as evil, dangerous, deprived, incapable
and vice-ridden. In return, they often had to resort to violence, rioting, etc. According to J. H. Plumb
(England in the Eighteenth Century, p. 13), they resorted to "[…] burning, looting [pillage], and
destruction by the mob were commonplaces of life". These acts were very violently repressed.
The upper-classes were so scared of the mob that laws became more and more cruel and repressive.
For instance, by the end of the 18th century, a child could be hanged just for stealing a handkerchief.
If compared to other monarchies, England's monarchy became a limited constitutional monarchy
after the Glorious Revolution (1688) ("the only one in the world", cf. J. H. Plumb, op. cit., p. 50).
Indeed, principles of a democratic form already existed in England, and nowhere else.
Along the freedoms an Englishman enjoyed was the freedom to disobey an unlawful order for
example. This, of course, implied that he had to prove in court that the official order was illegal
afterwards. Therefore, English monarchy was not based on divine right as in France for instance.
Other freedoms were the freedom of speech, of printing, and to a certain extent of the press. Louis
XIV's 1655 declaration "L'Etat, c'est moi" before the French Parliament was a proof of absolutism
and would have been unthinkable in 18th-century England.
The only freedom which was not guaranteed was that of conscience. There was generally more
tolerance in England than on the continent, except towards Catholics. Until 1829, Catholics, then
called "Papists", suffered from discrimination and could not obtain official posts in the administration.
Freedom of worship was granted to Dissenters (= Protestants) in the Toleration Act of 1689 but not to
Unitarians (until 1844) and Catholics. "Dissenters" were in fact the former "Puritans" (e.g. Cromwell),
today's "Non-conformists".
In England, there was the Church of England ruled by the King on the one hand, and Protestant sects
on the other: the Presbyterians, Congregationists, Independents, Baptists, Anabaptists, Quakers and,

later in the 18th century, the Methodists (with John Wesley). These religious minorities played an
important role, that of spreading the spirit of freedom.

Annex
I.Historians
I.Historians & Writers:
A.Daniel Defoe (1660-1731):

Daniel Defoe, the son of a butcher, was born in London in 1660. He attended Morton's Academy, a
school for Dissenters at Newington Green with the intention of becoming a minister, but he changed
his mind and became a hosiery merchant instead.
In 1688 Defoe took part in the Monmouth Rebellion and joined William III and his advancing army.
Defoe became popular with the king after the publication of his poem, The True Born Englishman
(1701). The poem attacked those who were prejudiced against having a king of foreign birth.
The publication of Defoe's The Shortest Way with the Dissenters (1702) upset a large number of
powerful people. In the pamphlet, Defoe, a Dissenter, ironically demanded the savage suppression of
dissent. The pamphlet was judged to be critical of the Anglican Church and Defoe was fined, put in
the Charing Cross Pillory and then sent to Newgate Prison.
In 1703 Robert Harley, Earl of Oxford, a Tory government official, employed Defoe as a spy. With the
support of the government, Defoe started the newspaper, The Review. Published between 1704 and
1713, the newspaper appeared three times a week. As well as carrying commercial advertising The
Review reported on political and social issues. Defoe also wrote several pamphlets for Harley
attacking the political opposition. The Whigs took Defoe court and this resulted in him serving
another prison sentence.
In 1719 Defoe turned to writing fiction. His novels include: Robinson Crusoe (1719), Captain
Singleton (1720), Journal of the Plague Year (1722), Captain Jack (1722), Moll Flanders (1722) and
Roxanda (1724).
Defoe also wrote a three volume travel book, Tour Through the Whole Island of Great Britain (1724-
27) that provided a vivid first-hand account of the state of the country. Other non-fiction books
include The Complete English Tradesman (1726) and London the Most Flourishing City in the
Universe (1728). Defoe published over 560 books and pamphlets and is considered to be the founder
of British journalism. Daniel Defoe died in 1731.
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/Jdefoe.htm
B.Christopher Alan Bayly (19**-20**):

British historian.
Professor Sir Christopher Alan Bayly is a British historian specializing in Indian, British Imperial, and
Global History. He is currently the Vere Harmsworth Professor of Imperial and Naval History at the
University of Cambridge. He was knighted in the Queen's Birthday Honours List of 2007 for his
services to History. Upon being informed of the award he stated: "I regard this not only as a
great personal honour but, as an historian of India, as recognition of the growing
importance of the history of the non-western world."
He is married to Dr Susan Bayly a lecturer in social anthropology at the University of Cambridge. He
is liked and admired by his doctoral students for the time and patience which he devotes to their
work, and to his painstaking and constructive criticisms on their submitted work.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Alan_Bayly
C.G.M. Trevelyan (1876-1962):

English historian.
George Macaulay Trevelyan, the son of the Liberal politician, George Otto Trevelyan, was born in
Stratford-on-Avon in 1876. After being educated at Harrow and Trinity College, Cambridge, he taught
modern history. His early books included Giribaldi (1907) and John Bright (1913).
Although his older brother, Charles Trevelyan, resigned from Asquith's government in protest at
Britain's involvement in the First World War, George served in the British Army.

After the war, Trevelyan became regius professor of modern history at Cambridge University. His
books include British History in the Nineteenth Century (1922), History of England (1926), George
Otto Trevelyan (1932) and English Social History (1944). George Macaulay Trevelyan died in 1962.
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/Jtrevelyan.htm
D.J.H. Plumb:
British Historian
He is seen as mentor to a school of historians, having in common a wish to write accessible, broad-
based work for the public: a generation of scholars that includes Roy Porter, Simon Schama, Linda
Colley, David Cannadine and others, who came to prominence in the 1990s. He was champion of a
'social history' in a wide sense; he backed this up with a connoisseur's knowledge of some fields of
the fine arts, such as Flemish painting and porcelain. This approach rubbed off on those he
influenced, while he clashed unrepentantly with other historians (notably Cambridge colleague
Geoffrey Elton, with a perspective from constitutional history) whose emphasis was on more
traditional scholarship.
He was born in Leicester and educated at Alderman Newton's Grammar School, University College,
Leicester and then Christ's College, Cambridge. His doctorate (1936) was supervised by G. M.
Trevelyan; this was the unique occasion when Trevelyan accepted a student. He had a research
fellowship at King's College, Cambridge just before World War II, during which he was at Bletchley
Park where he headed a section working on a German Naval hand cipher, Reservehandverfahren.
He became a Fellow of Christ's College in 1946, remaining there. He was Master of the college from
1978 to 1982. He became Professor of Modern English History in the University in 1966. He was
knighted in 1982.
In the 1960s he branched out as an editor, notably of The History of Human Society series. Later he
worked on a television series about the British Royal family and the royal collections.
Friends from his early life, C. P. Snow and William Cooper, portrayed him in novels; he also is known
to be the model for a character in an Angus Wilson short story, The Wrong Set.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J.H._Plumb
E.Overton:
(à completer)
F.Lord Engle
(à completer)
II.Inventors
II.Inventors
A.Arthur Young (1741-1820):

Essayist, Pioneer of Scientific Farming
Arthur Young was a tireless propagandist for agricultural improvement and sent most of his life
travelling in England, Wales, Ireland and France, observing agricultural methods and arguing for
scientific improvement.
He was widely regarded by his contemporaries as the leading agricultural writer of the time. Born in
London, he was the youngest child of the Suffolk gentry landowners Anne and the Reverend Arthur.
Young was educated at Lavenham Grammar School, and after abortive attempts to become a
merchant and then army officer, in 1763 took a farm on his mother's estate at Bradfield, although he
had little knowledge of farming. Nevertheless he conducted a variety of agricultural experiments and
continued his early interest in writing by publishing his first major agricultural work, The Farmer's
Letters, in 1767. Young's subsequent output was prolific. Most famous are his Tours of England,
Ireland and France, which mixed travel diaries with facts, figures and critical commentary on farming
practices. In 1784 he founded the periodical Annals of Agriculture, and edited the forty-six volumes
published as well as contributing a large proportion of their content. Young was somewhat
controversially appointed Secretary of the Board of Agriculture (a state-sponsored body promoting
improved farming standards) in 1793, a position he held until his death. He also wrote six of the
Board's surveys of English counties.

Young was a vigorous advocate of agrarian improvements, especially enclosures and long leases,
and his statistics and lively prose must have helped publicize and diffuse the innovations in farming
practices that were taking place. He was consulted by agriculturists and politicians at home and
abroad, including George Washington, and received numerous honors. His marriage to Martha Allen
from 1765 was unhappy, though, with faults seemingly on both sides. The youngest of the couple's
four children died in 1797, triggering the melancholia and religious fervor that characterised Young in
his later years. His prodigious work rate slowed after about 1805 on account of deteriorating vision,
and ultimately blindness.
Some contemporary rivals, notably William Marshall, were fiercely critical of Young's abilities as a
farmer and accurate observer: the judgment of historians remains divided. Young certainly never
made a financial success of farming, but this was partly because he expended large sums on
agricultural experiments and was frequently absent from his farm writing or travelling. Allegations
that Young's enquiries were based on alehouse gossip, or conducted too hastily, are perhaps not
without some truth, but his sample survey investigative procedure undoubtedly represented a
pioneering scientific approach to agricultural research. Ironically, historians' analysis of Youngs facts
and figures has produced results that do not always support his original conclusions. For example,
enclosures turn out to be not as important in increasing farm output as Young maintained.
http://eh.net/encyclopedia/article/stead.young
http://www.litencyc.com/php/speople.php?rec=true&UID=4839
B.Lord Ernle (1851-1937):

British agriculturist and politician.
Rowland Edmund Prothero was educated at Marlborough and Balliol College, Oxford, where he took
his degree in 1875, subsequently being elected to an All Souls fellowship. He remained at Oxford for
some years as a fellow and tutor, and became well known as an authority upon agriculture. He
gained a 1st class honours degree in Modern History in 1875. He was a Fellow of All Souls' College,
Oxford 1875-1891, and was Proctor in 1883-1884. He was awarded Members of the Royal Victorian
Order in 1901
He published The Pioneers and Progress of English Farming in 1888 and edited Quarterly Review from
1893 to 1899. From 1898 to 1918, he was chief agent for the 11th Duke of Bedford, and in this
capacity his experience on agricultural questions was much extended. In 1910 he unsuccessfully
contested the Biggleswade and was elected as Conservative Member of Parliament for Oxford
University at a by-election in 1914, holding the seat until 1919. He held office as President of the
Board of Agriculture from 1916-19. In that role he introduced a guaranteed price for wheat.
He sat on the departmental committees on the home production of food (1914) and the increased
price of commodities (1915), and in 1916, on the formation of Mr. Lloyd George's Government, was
appointed a Privy Counsellor and became president of the Board of Agriculture. He resigned his office
in 1919 and was raised to the peerage as 1st Baron Ernle in 1919, a title chosen in reflection of his
pride in his own matrilineal descent from the Ernle family, one of the historic landed families of
Sussex and Wiltshire. The barony became extinct upon his death.
Lord Ernie published Pioneers and Progress of English Farming (1887), and English Farming, Past and
Present (1912); besides the Life and Correspondence of Dean Stanley (1893); Letters of Edward
Gibbon (1896); a Memoir of Prince Henry of Battenberg (privately printed, 1897); Letters and
Journals of Lord Byron (1898-1901) and Letters of Richard Ford (1905). His Psalms in Human Life
(1903; enlarged 1913), tracing the influence of the Psalter on the notable men of succeeding
generations, had a great popular success.
http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Rowland_Edmund_Prothero_Ernle
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rowland_Edmund_Prothero
C.Jethro Tull (1674-1741):

English agricultural pioneer during the Industrial Revolution and the Agricultural Revolution.
Jethro Tull invented the seed drill (in 1701), the horse-drawn hoe, and an improved plough. Tull was
educated at Oxford, England where studied law, he later studied agriculture during his travels across
Europe. He inherited land in the southern part of England where he put into practice his study of
agriculture.

His seed drill would sow seed in uniform rows and cover up the seed in the rows. Up to that point,
sowing seeds was done by hand by scattering seeds on the ground. Tull considered this method
wasteful since many seeds did not take root. The first prototype seed drill was built from the foot
pedals of Jethro Tull's local church organ.
Jethro Tull was part of a group of farmers who founded the Norfolk system, an early attempt to apply
science to farming. In 1731, he published The New Horse Houghing Husbandry: or, an Essay on the
Principles of Tillage and Vegetation.
http://inventors.about.com/library/inventors/bljethrotull.htm
D.Lord Charles Townshend (1674-1738):

English politician and agriculturalist. He was secretary of state under George I 1714-17, when
dismissed for opposing the king's foreign policy, and 1721-30, after which he retired to his farm and
did valuable work in developing crop rotation and cultivating winter feeds for cattle (hence his
nickname).
Townshend did not, in fact, originate the new techniques with which his name has become
associated. Turnips, for example, were already being grown in East Anglia, England, as a fodder crop
from at least the 1660s, and it is unlikely that he ever adopted the four-course turnips-barley-clover-
wheat rotation. This was not taken up until many years after his death. Through the successful
development of his agricultural estate at Rainham in W Norfolk, however, Townshend brought a
range of improved cultivation practices to wider public notice.
http://www.cartage.org.lb/en/themes/Biographies/MainBiographies/T/Townshend/1.html
E.Thomas William Coke (1754-1842):

English agriculturist
Thomas William Coke, 1st Earl of Leicester (6 May 1754 – 30 June 1842) became famous for his
advanced methods of animal husbandry used in improving his estate at Holkham in Norfolk. As a
result, Coke of Norfolk is seen as one of the instigators of the British Agricultural Revolution.
Thomas Coke's efforts to improve the Holkham Hall estate became a marathon project which began
in 1776 and lasted until his death in 1842. His land around Holkham in Norfolk was poor and
neglected, but he introduced many improvements, obtained the best expert advice, and in a few
years wheat was grown upon his farms, and the breed of cattle, sheep and pigs greatly improved. It
has been said that "his practice is really the basis of every treatise on modern agriculture." Under his
direction the rental of the Holkham estate is said to have increased from £2 200 to over £ 20,000 a
year. People interested in farming were said to flock to gatherings at Holkham – the so-called
Holkham shearings – from all over Britain and from overseas. The 'Shearings' were the fore-runners
of today's agricultural shows. He is particularly credited with improvements to animal breeding and
husbandry relating to cattle, sheep and pigs.
For most of his life, he was happy to remain plain Mr Coke: it is said that he had been offered a
peerage seven times by six different Prime Ministers: sometimes by Whigs as a reward; at others by
Tories as a bribe. Often celebrated by the title Coke of Norfolk, Coke was eventually ennobled by
Queen Victoria in 1837, accepting a new Earldom of Leicester so that the sons of his second
marriage might inherit his title, and was created Viscount Coke and Earl of Leicester, of Holkham in
the County of Norfolk.
http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Thomas_William_Coke,_Earl_Of_Leicester
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Coke,_1st_Earl_of_Leicester_(seventh_creation)
F.Collings Brothers:
Stock raisers, first scientific breeders of Shorthorn, or Durham, beef cattle.
Robert Colling (1749 - March 7, 1820), and his brother Charles (1751 - January 16, 1836), English
stock breeders, famous for their improvement of the Shorthorn breed of cattle, were the sons of
Charles Colling, a farmer of Ketton near Darlington. Their lives are closely connected with the history
of the Shorthorn breed. Of the two brothers, Charles is probably the better known, and it was his visit
to the farm of Robert Bakewell at Dishley that first led the brothers to realize the possibilities of
scientific selective breeding of cattle. Charles succeeded to his father's farm at Ketton. Robert, after
being first apprenticed to a grocer in Shields, took a farm at Barmpton. An animal which he bought at

Charles's advice for and afterwards sold to his brother, became known as the celebrated Hubback, a
bull which formed the basis of both the Ketton and Barmpton herds.
The two brothers pursued the same system of inbreeding which they had learned from Robert
Bakewell, and both the Ketton and the Barmpton herds were sold by auction in the autumn of 1810.
Robert Colling died unmarried at Barmpton on the 7th of March 1820, leaving his property to his
brother. Charles Colling, who is remembered as the owner of the famous bulls Hubback, Favorite and
Comet, and the breeder of the celebrated Durham Ox, was more of a specialist and a businessman
than his brother. He died on the 16th of January 1836.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Colling
G.Denis Papin (1647-1712):

French physicist, mathematician and inventor, best known for his pioneering invention of the steam
digester, the forerunner of the steam engine.
Denis Papin attended a Jesuit school in Blois then, in 1661, he began his studies at the University of
Angers. He graduated with a medical degree in 1669.
Papin assisted Huygens with air pump experiments from 1671 to 1674, during which time he lived in
Huygens's apartments in the Royal Library in Paris. Papin went to London in 1675 to work with Boyle.
He remained in this post until 1679 when he became Hooke's assistant at the Royal Society. Papin
was elected a Fellow of the Royal Society in 1680.
In 1681 Papin left for Italy where he was director of experiments at the Accademia publicca di
scienze in Venice until 1684. There was an attempt to turn the Accademia in Venice into a Society
modelled on the Royal Society in London and the Académie Royale in Paris but lack of financial
support ended the attempt.
There were religious reasons why Papin could not return to France. He was a Calvinist, born into a
Huguenot family, and after the Edict of Nantes which had granted religious liberty to the Huguenots
was revoked by Louis XIV in 1685, he became an exile.
Papin returned to London in 1684 working again with the Royal Society until 1687. After this Papin
left England and went to Hesse-Kassel where he was appointed professor of mathematics at the
University of Marburg. He held this post until 1696 when he worked for the Landgrave of Hesse-
Kassel until 1707. This time in Hesse-Kassel was not a successful one for Papin who found himself in
disagreement with his colleagues.
Papin is best known for his work as an inventor, particularly his work on the steam engine. In 1679
he invented the pressure cooker and, in 1690 he published his first work on the steam engine in De
novis quibusdam machinis. The purpose of the steam engine was to raise water to a canal between
Kassel and Karlshaven. He also used a steam engine to pump water to a tank on the roof of the
palace to supply water for the fountains in the grounds. In 1705, when Leibniz sent Papin a sketch of
a steam engine, Papin began working on that topic again and wrote The New Art of Pumping Water
by using Steam (1707). He designed a safety valve to prevent the pressure of steam building up to
dangerous levels.
Other inventions which Papin worked on were the construction of a submarine, an air gun and a
grenade launcher. He tried to build up a glass industry in Hesse-Kassel and also experimented with
preserving food both with chemicals and using a vacuum.
In 1707 Papin built the first paddle boat and that same year he returned to London where he lived in
obscurity and poverty until his death. The date given for his death is only a guess since no records
seem to exist of his last years in London. His last known letter is dated 23 January 1712.
http://www-history.mcs.st-andrews.ac.uk/Biographies/Papin.html
H.Thomas Savery (1650-1715):

English inventor, born at Shilstone, a manor house near Modbury, Devon, England.
Initially interested in naval applications of engineering (he designed an early paddle-wheel), Savery
then became interested in pumping machines. On July 2, 1698 he patented an early steam engine,
and in 1702 he published details of the machine in the book Miner's Friend, which claimed that it
could pump water out of mines. Savery's pump had no piston, but used a combination of
atmospheric pressure and steam pressure to raise water. The atmospheric action was limited to
lifting a column of water about thirty feet high. This could be increased to about fifty feet by using

steam pressure, but the extra stress placed on the boiler by this pressure made it unreliable. The
machine was therefore not capable of raising water from the depth of a mine, and the almost only
known working versions were used for water-supply pumping in London. However an attempt was
made (unsuccessfully) to use one to clear water from a mine at Broadwaters in Wednesbury, then in
Staffordshire.
Savery worked for the Sick and Hurt Commissioners. His duties took him to Dartmouth, which is
probably how he came into contact with Thomas Newcomen. The Commissioners contracted the
supply of medicines to the Navy Stock Company, which was connected with the Society of
Apothecaries, John Meres being clerk to both.
In 1701, he obtained an Act of Parliament extending the life of his patent for a further 21 years, to
1733. Rights under this passed to the unincorporated Proprietors of the Invention for Raising Water
by Fire. The John Meres was their secretary and treasurer.
By 1712, arrangements were made with Thomas Newcomen to develop Newcomen's more advanced
design of steam engine, which was marketed under Savery's patent. Newcomen's engine worked
purely by atmospheric pressure, thereby avoiding the dangers of high-pressure steam, and used the
piston concept invented in 1690 by the Frenchman Denis Papin to produce the first steam engine
capable of raising water from deep mines.
Several later pumping systems may be based on Savery's pump. For example, the twin-chamber
pulsometer steam pump was a successful development of it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Savery
I.Thomas Newcomen (1663-1729):

Ironmonger by profession, but made a significant contribution to the Industrial Revolution with his
invention of the atmospheric steam engine.
Thomas Newcomen was born in Dartmouth, Devon in 1663 and established himself as an ironmonger
in his home town. Some of his biggest customers were Cornish tin mine owners, who faced
considerable difficulties with flooding as mines became progressively deeper. The standard methods
to remove the water - manual pumping or teams of horses hauling buckets on a rope - were slow and
expensive, and they sought an alternative.
Contemporary engines worked by using condensed steam to make a vacuum, but whereas Thomas
Savery's pump of 1698 had just used the vacuum to pull the water up, Newcomen created his
vacuum inside a cylinder and used it to pull down a piston. He then used a lever to transfer the force
to the pump shaft that went down the mine: it was the first practical engine to use a piston in a
cylinder. Casting the cylinders and getting the pistons to fit was pushing the limit of existing
technology, so Newcomen deliberately made the piston marginally smaller than the cylinder and
sealed the gap with a ring of wet leather or rope. However, to avoid infringing Savery's patent
Newcomen was forced to go into partnership with him.
His first working engine was installed at a coalmine at Dudley Castle in Staffordshire in 1712. It had a
cylinder 21 inches in diameter and nearly eight feet long, and it worked at twelve strokes a minute,
raising ten gallons of water from a depth of 156 feet; approximately 5.5 horse power. The engines
were rugged and reliable and worked day and night, but were extremely inefficient.
Newcomen engines were extremely expensive but were nevertheless very successful. By the time
Newcomen died on 5 August 1729 there were at least one hundred of his engines in Britain and
across Europe.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/historic_figures/newcomen_thomas.shtml
III.Historical
III.Historical Figures
A.George II (1683-1760:
George was elector of Hanover and second Hanoverian king of Great Britain and Ireland.
George was born in Hanover, Germany on 10 November 1683, the only son of the elector of Hanover.
In 1705 he married Princess Caroline of Brandenburg-Ansbach, and they had nine children.
In 1714 George's father succeeded to the British throne, and created George prince of Wales. The
relationship between father and son was already poor and the prince's London residence, Leicester
House, became a rival court and focus for a dissident Whig group which included Robert Walpole. He

encouraged a reconciliation between father and son. This led to Walpole's inclusion in George I's
administration, whereupon he lost the prince's favour. Only Caroline's intervention kept Walpole in
office when the prince succeeded to the throne in 1727. He cemented his position by securing
George a Civil List (allowance) from Parliament of £800,000, considerably more than previous
monarchs had received. Walpole also won acknowledgement of George's legitimacy from many
influential Tories who supported the exiled Stuart pretender to the English throne. As a result, no
senior politician deserted George's cause during the Jacobite Rebellion of 1745. Charles Edward
Stuart, the 'Young Pretender' landed in Scotland but, after some initial success, was defeated at the
Battle of Culloden in 1746.
George seemed destined to imitate his father, quarrelling with his son Frederick Louis, Prince of
Wales, who in turn became a leader of an anti-administration faction. War broke out with Spain in
1739. In 1742 Walpole, who had dominated government since 1721, resigned. George quickly found
another mentor in John Carteret who, with George, brought England into the War of the Austrian
Succession (1740-48), prompting accusations that he was subordinating English interests to those of
George's German possessions. In 1743, George led his troops into battle against the French at
Dettingen, the last British king to fight alongside his soldiers.
During the last decade of his life George took little interest in politics. Britain's involvement in the
Seven Years' War (1756 - 1763) was largely overseen by William Pitt the Elder. This period also saw
the expansion of British influence in India and Canada with the military successes of Clive and Wolfe.
George died on 25 October 1760. Frederick had died in 1751, leaving George's grandson to inherit
the throne.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/historic_figures/george_ii_king.shtml
B.Oliver Cromwell (1599 – 1658):

English soldier and statesman who helped make England a republic and then ruled as lord protector
from 1653 to 1658.
Oliver Cromwell was born on 25 April 1599 in Huntingdon, Cambridgeshire into a family of minor
gentry and studied at Cambridge University. He became MP for Huntingdon in the parliament of 1628
- 1629. In the 1630s Cromwell experienced a religious crisis and became convinced that he would be
guided to carry out God's purpose. He began to make his name as a radical Puritan when, in 1640,
he was elected to represent Cambridge, first in the Short Parliament and then in the Long Parliament.
Civil war broke out between King Charles I and parliament in 1642. Although Cromwell lacked
military experience, he created and led a superb force of cavalry, the 'Ironsides', and rose from the
rank of captain to that of lieutenant-general in three years. He convinced parliament to establish a
professional army - the New Model Army - which won the decisive victory over the king's forces at
Naseby (1645). The king's alliance with the Scots and his subsequent defeat in the Second Civil War
convinced Cromwell that the king must be brought to justice. He was a prime mover in the trial and
execution of Charles I in 1649 and subsequently sought to win conservative support for the new
republic by suppressing radial elements in the army. Cromwell became army commander and lord
lieutenant of Ireland, where he crushed resistance with the massacres of the garrisons at Drogheda
and Wexford (1649).
Cromwell then defeated the supporters of the king's son Charles II at Dunbar (1650) and Worcester
(1651), effectively ending the civil war. In 1653, frustrated with lack of progress, he dissolved the
rump of the Long Parliament and, after the failure of his Puritan convention (popularly known as
Barebones Parliament) made himself lord protector. In 1657 he refused the offer of the crown. At
home Lord Protector Cromwell reorganised the national church, established Puritanism, readmitted
Jews into Britain and presided over a certain degree of religious tolerance. Abroad, he ended the war
with Portugal (1653) and Holland (1654) and allied with France against Spain, defeating the Spanish
at the Battle of the Dunes (1658). Cromwell died on 3 September 1658 in London. After the
Restoration his body was dug up and hanged.
Cromwell's son Richard was named as his successor and was lord protector of England from
September 1658 to May 1659. He could not reconcile various political, military and religious factions
and soon lost the support of the army on which his power depended. He was forced to abdicate and
after the restoration of the monarchy in 1660 he fled to Paris. He returned to England in 1680 and
lived quietly under an assumed name until his death in 1712
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/historic_figures/cromwell_oliver.shtml

C.Abraham Darby (1678-1717):

English Quaker family that played a role in the Industrial Revolution.
Abraham Darby made scientific and industrial advances of such importance that he is directly
responsible for the way we all live today. His advances have touched people in every part of the
globe and played an important role in enabling Britain to become the World's most dominant
industrial, military and colonial power in the 17th and 18th Centuries.
His work, inventions and innovations at his new factories at Cheese Lane (near Temple Meads in
Bristol) and Baptist Mills were to prove of immense importance to the future British Industrial
Revolution.
His important achievements during his 10 year stay in Bristol can be summarised as follows:
•Developing a scientific understanding of the Brass making process. - thus transforming
Britain into a Brass producer and exporter.
•Personally going to Holland/The Low Countries and recruiting skilled, Catholic, brass
workers who knew many of the industrial secrets of Brass production and the making of Brass
Battery (This is the process of using water power to drive hammers which shaped cold brass plate
into various types of hollowware).
•He brought together the existing advances in iron casting technology and merged it with
the expertise of brass founders who could make cast items which were more complex in shape and
design
•Casting Brass and Iron in sand moulds - a process which made production of cast iron and
brass goods continuous. For the first time cast brass and ironware were not made on an individual
basis. This was vital in being the first step towards 'factory-style' mass production and lead to
massive increases in productivity, reduced unit costs and made 'goods' available to a wider
geographical range of people. The advance of casting metals in sand was an important factor in
stimulating consumer demand. The items produced were important in meeting the expanding export
market - slave trade in West Africa and for industrial and domestic use in the new West Indian and
American colonies.
•Casting in sand allowed for more complex castings to be made - this was vital for the future
production of steam engines and other machinery.
•It can be safely said that he was the inventor of coke smelting. He used coal as a fuel for
brass and cast iron manufactory. By 1700 there was a national scarcity of supplies of charcoal which
was the fuel of metal making. Darby's successful experiments in using coal as a substitute for
charcoal was a major factor in the future success of the British Industrial Revolution. [The year 1712
saw 250 tons of coal (400 horseloads a week) being used by the Baptist Mills Brass Works].
•The Brass Works at Baptist Mills saw the creation of the World's first scientific Metallurgy
Laboratory where, working with fellow Quaker, John Thomas, Darby made major advances in
understanding the processes involved in producing, and maintaining the quality, of different types of
brass.
•Darby made significant advances in furnace design which were a result of his cross-over
working in the fields of both Iron and Brass Manufacture.
After leaving the Bristol area in 1709 Darby set up Brass and Iron works in Shropshire. Here he
continued to develop his revolutionary Industrial and Business Organisational methods. It was here,
at Coalbrookdale , that he laid the foundations for what was to become the most important iron
producing area in the world.
This further development, largely financed by Bristol Quakers, established what is now recognised as
an Industrial Complex which is of World Importance. The area involved is now the Ironbridge Gorge
Museums, on the banks of the River Severn and is designated a World Heritage Site.
http://www.cems.uwe.ac.uk/~rstephen/livingeaston/local_history/Darby.html
D.John Wesley (1703-1791):

During the late Eighteenth Century, the pseudo-science of craniology attempted to explain the
differences between saints and criminals (and other human differences) in terms of variations in the
size, shape, and proportions of skulls. To advance this research, impressions of the faces of recently

deceased persons were taken, producing what came to be called "death masks." Methodists
prepared John Wesley's Death Mask, however, to insure that future statuary would represent him
accurately. The mask is courtesy of the Drew University Methodist Collection (Madison, New Jersey).
Wesley died on Wednesday March 2, 1791, in his eighty-eighth year. As he lay dying, his friends
gathered around him, Wesley grasped their hands and said repeatedly, "Farewell, farewell." At the
end, summoning all his remaining strength, he cried out, "The best of all is, God is with us," lifted his
arms and raised his feeble voice again, repeating the words, "The best of all is, God is with us."
http://wesley.nnu.edu/john_wesley/index.htm

The Eighteenth Century

Cargado por

Información del documento

Derechos de autor

Formatos disponibles

Compartir este documento

Compartir o incrustar documentos

Opciones para compartir

¿Le pareció útil este documento?

¿Este contenido es inapropiado?

Copyright:

Formatos disponibles

The Eighteenth Century

Cargado por

Copyright:

Formatos disponibles

British Civilisation: Economic and social change in Britain 1750-1850

The Eighteenth Century

Mr. Darribehaude 2007/2008 1

I. Thomas Newcomen (1663-1729):............................................................................................ .....24

Mr. Darribehaude Semester 3 2

General introduction: some food for thought

Mr. Darribehaude 2007/2008 3

ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL SITUATION IN BRITAIN

Mr. Darribehaude Semester 3 4

Mr. Darribehaude 2007/2008 5

Mr. Darribehaude Semester 3 6

Mr. Darribehaude 2007/2008 7

Mr. Darribehaude Semester 3 8

Mr. Darribehaude 2007/2008 9

Mr. Darribehaude Semester 3 10

Mr. Darribehaude 2007/2008 11

C.Other manufactured goods

Mr. Darribehaude Semester 3 12

Mr. Darribehaude 2007/2008 13

Mr. Darribehaude Semester 3 14

Mr. Darribehaude 2007/2008 15

THE POPULATION AND SOCIETY – THE SPIRIT OF THE

Mr. Darribehaude Semester 3 16

•He represented the only form of local administration at the time.

Mr. Darribehaude 2007/2008 17

Mr. Darribehaude Semester 3 18

A.Daniel Defoe (1660-1731):

B.Christopher Alan Bayly (19**-20**):

C.G.M. Trevelyan (1876-1962):

Mr. Darribehaude 2007/2008 19

A.Arthur Young (1741-1820):

Mr. Darribehaude Semester 3 20

B.Lord Ernle (1851-1937):

C.Jethro Tull (1674-1741):

Mr. Darribehaude 2007/2008 21

D.Lord Charles Townshend (1674-1738):

E.Thomas William Coke (1754-1842):

Mr. Darribehaude Semester 3 22

G.Denis Papin (1647-1712):

H.Thomas Savery (1650-1715):

Mr. Darribehaude 2007/2008 23

I.Thomas Newcomen (1663-1729):

Mr. Darribehaude Semester 3 24

B.Oliver Cromwell (1599 – 1658):

Mr. Darribehaude 2007/2008 25

C.Abraham Darby (1678-1717):

D.John Wesley (1703-1791):

Mr. Darribehaude Semester 3 26

Mr. Darribehaude 2007/2008 27

También podría gustarte

B.Christopher Alan Bayly (19-20):