1 What problems did rural society face and what was their response to them?

In the period 1500-1800, life for rural and urban inhabitants was extremely challenging and demanding compared to modern day living. Problems that we would today see as trivial to our individual lives were particularly significant to whole communities in early modern England and were not always easily overcome. In this essay, I am going to be looking at the problems that rural society faced and their responses to them. I will be concentrating on the lower classes rather than the landed elites and middling sort as I believe they experienced the most hardship. After much research, I have come up with four main problems that rural society had to confront. These are disorder within the community, population growth in the towns and cities, unemployment and harvest failures. I am going to argue that harvest failure was predominant threat because it not only affected rural society, but urban as well. Plus, it was essentially a cause for secondary problems, whereas the other three were not as significant in the long term. The spirit and sense of community was very strong in the early modern period and maintaining normality and stability was extremely important, without it, the whole social structure would have been threatened. There were two main problems that risked the order of the community; the poor and internal conflicts. The poor often lived in a terrible state of poverty and were nearly always unemployed, either due to illness, age or indolence. Their plight was relieved by begging and by charity from either the church or contributions and alms from prosperous individuals such as the gentry, merchants and even some wealthy farmers.1 However, it soon became apparent that new methods were needed due to the economic and social problems that arose as a result of the massive population growth in the early sixteenth century. 2 The response was not so much from rural society but from central government, who established a national poor law system in 1597, in which a tax was imposed on all the working inhabitants and land owners of the community.3 The legislation divided the poor into two groups; the undeserving poor, the vagrants and beggars who wandered the streets but also the able bodied, and the impotent poor, those whose need for support was justified.4 Hindle argues there was a strong reluctance to assist anybody except the deserving poor because beggars and vagabonds were viewed as an economic burden, hence they were punished accordingly; whipped and sent back to their parish of origin.5 Overall, each individual parish was responsible for the administration of the scheme through church wardens and overseers of the poor, so although rural society did not pass the poor law legislation, they certainly ensured that it was adhered to. Internal conflict between persons of differing social status and of equals was a constant feature of community life. Order and harmony were frequently being threatened and this was seen as a major problem for the village inhabitants, thus there was a need to balance the forces of cooperation and tension.6 Wrightson contends that rural society achieved this through village sports and games, dances, ales and parish feasts. These events reinforced the neighbourly ties and collective identity of the village, they gave the opportunity to settle disputes and increase the love among neighbours.7 He further argues that festivals
1 2

J. A. Sharpe, Early Modern England: A Social History 1550-1760, (London, Arnold, 1997), p.216 Sharpe, Early Modern England, p.216 3 Andrew Hinde, Englands Population, (London, Hodder Education, 2003), p.158 4 Hinde, Englands Population, p.158 5 M Braddick and J Walter (eds), Negotiating Power in Early Modern Society, (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2001), p. 111 6 Keith Wrightson, English Society: 1580-1680, (London, Hutchinson, 1982), p. 62 7 Wrightson, English Society, p.62

2 were essential for the differing social classes because it allowed for them to mingle through common participation, plus, some events included ritual reversal of rank/authority, thus vertically aligned groups would have their worlds turned upside down for the day.8 Population growth had expanded dramatically from 3.75 million to 5.5 million by the early eighteenth century.9 There were a much larger proportion of people in towns and cities than before and this caused a major strain on the countryside to increase agricultural production because there was a greater dependent population, a population that was not self sufficient in foodstuffs.10 In order for rural society to respond to this, farming techniques needed to progress and evolve from the backwardness that had been occupying lands for centuries. Overton argues that more food actually needed to be produced from each individual, rather than a need to increase the number of farm workers and this would only be achieved through improved efficiency.11 Therefore, new crops such as clover, turnips and grasses were introduced to help restore the fertility of the soil and provide additional fodder to grazing animals, whose manure was used during the farming year.12 Overton further contends that the cultivation of clover in the late eighteenth and nineteenth centuries increased the supply of nitrogen to the soil by over sixty per cent, which in turn helped boost grain production in the face of overwhelming demand.13 The development of new farming machinery reduced the labour requirements originally needed in some tasks, for example through the improvement of ploughs. Jethro Tull designed the first seed drill, although its use was not widespread, and a horse hoe, which was extremely valuable for enhanced cultivation and reducing weeds.14 The threshing machine was important because it eliminated the time consuming chore of threshing corn by hand.15 However, in the long term I think the pressure on rural society to maximise food production was overcome by the Agricultural Revolution, which actually led to massive farming improvements and the increase in overseas imports through the Triangular Trade. Unemployment was an exceedingly common problem with early modern rural society and it was caused by a number of factors. I am going to look at just two; enclosure of land and growth of factory industries. Until the late eighteenth century there was an open field system in which inhabitants of rural communities were all entitled to a share of the land. Nearly every cottage had at least a strip in the common field and enjoyed communal rights to the waste land whereby they could graze sheep, horses and cattle.16 However, with the introduction of enclosure (that eventually became an act of parliament), the open fields were fenced by hedgerows and the owner had exclusive access to the land. Common rights to the waste land were abolished and it was merged with the farmlands for extra cultivation.17 Bovill argues that the open field system benefited rural society because individuals were able to produce cheap food for themselves and their family, plus a surplus to send to market, giving them a small income. In the long term, they could save and

8 9

Wrightson, English Society, p.63 H T Dickinson, A Companion to Eighteenth Century Britain (Oxford, Blackwell Pub., 2002), p.141 10 Leslie Clarkson, Death, Disease and Famine in pre-Industrial England, (Dublin, Gill & Macmillan, 1975), p.25 11 Mark Overton, Re-establishing the Agricultural Revolution, Agricultural History Review, 44, (1998), p.5 12 Dickinson, A Companion to Eighteenth Century Britain p.147 13 Overton, Re-establishing the Agricultural Revolution, p.11 14 Dickinson, A Companion to Eighteenth Century Britain, p.148 15 Dickinson, A Companion to Eighteenth Century Britain, p.148 16 E W Bovill, English Country Life: 1780-1830, (London, Oxford University Press, 1962), p.13 17 Dickinson, A Companion to Eighteenth Century Britain, p.149

3 invest in more land in the common field and thus have the chance to better themselves and move up in the social scale. Conversely, with the new closed system, these advantages disappeared.18 Enclosure had a disastrous effect for the poorer sections of the community who relied on access to the common lands. Bovill uses the example of a plebeian man to illustrate the severity of the reorganisation of the farm lands. A very poor mans allotment might be no more than an acre, with perhaps a small cash payment as compensation for loss of his rights in common waste. He had been able to graze his cow, which supplied his children with milk. He could probably not afford to fence up his acre and even if he could, it would still not support his cow. He would therefore have to sell both his land and his cow.19 The poorer rural populace were at the complete mercy of the larger employers; they did not have a stable wage or a regular occupation. Landowners preferred splitting their property into bigger units as it was more economical but it meant many workers were deprived of their cottage and had no work. 20 Before the nineteenth century, manufacturers had much of their work completed in villages surrounding bigger towns. However, with the introduction of new machines, it was cheaper to have the work done in the factories in the urban areas, due to inexpensive coal and transport. This resulted in the loss of the cottage industries and thus made rural inhabitants completely dependent on wages.21 Consequently, many cottage folk moved to the new industrial towns in search of manufacturing employment and there was mass emigration of the small farmers to America, where they could acquire land to start up their own smallholding.22 The possibility of harvest failures was an ongoing threat for the inhabitants of rural society. Food shortages was the obvious result (at the time it could not be countered by imports), but this rapidly led to more substantial problems, such as starvation and even famine, high prices, the risk of poverty and the spread of disease. Unlike the other problems I have discussed, harvest failure and its products were extremely difficult to overcome and continued to be a major hindrance in the development of rural society. This is because harvest failure was usually the result of bad weather; wet and cold summers had a catastrophic effect on grain production and from about 1645 to 1715, England was experiencing The Little Ice Age, a period of severe climate conditions.23 Famine seldom occurred in pre-industrial England, but hunger and even starvation continued to be a prominent feature of harvest failures. However, while some poorer sections of society did die due to sheer starvation, Sharpe argues that many were actually the victims of diseases such as diphtheria, dysentery and typhoid. Hunger and malnourishment continually weakened resistance to disease but infections and

18 19

Bovill, English Country Life: 1780-1830, p.13 Bovill, English Country Life: 1780-1830, p.13 20 Bovill, English Country Life: 1780-1830, p.14 21 Bovill, English Country Life: 1780-1830, p.15 22 Bovill, English Country Life: 1780-1830, p.15 23 Sharpe, Early Modern England, p.50

4 sickness were further brought about by people eating rotten and inapt food.24 Subsequently, Slack claims that diseases were spread by beggars and vagrants, who roamed from village to village, hunting for food; even individual migrants in search of employment contributed to the spread.25 A period of dearth nearly always followed harvest failures and increased grain prices resulted in many experiencing episodes of poverty. Due to the dire harvest in 1790, prices for wheat shot up from thirty one shillings per quarter to fifty three shillings.26 But Sharpe argues that demand for grain continued, despite the rise in cost because there was no alternative foodstuffs that were reasonably priced.27 It is difficult to know how rural society responded when faced with food shortages, disease and poverty but I believe that an effective method would be that of Malthuss Preventative Check. Malthus argued that individuals should delay marriage until the economic climate was favourable and they could afford to raise a family without risking poverty.28 Therefore, when bad harvests occurred, individuals who had not yet built up a supply of resources, such as capital and stable employment would not have the economic burden of children and hence would have less risk of poverty. For families, Malthus argues that birth control should be practised, such as abstinence from sexual intercourse and breastfeeding, seeing as lactation inhibits ovulation.29 As a result, families who had an established unit, with a constant income would be able to manage in times of hardship, as long as they could support their children. Although these solutions may not have benefited in the short term, they were certainly successful in the long run, as it gave the opportunity for inhabitants to work towards a secure economic position within society, allowing them to survive food shortages and defeat the risk of poverty. To conclude, it is evident that inhabitants of rural society faced many difficulties and complications, but I consider the continuous threat of harvest failures to be the most significant. The causes of the other problems I discussed were mainly social, economic and political, whereas harvest failure was entirely environmental and there was no way in which individuals could have prevented it from occurring. The impact it had on society was detrimental and it not only effected rural communities, but urban as well due to the massive dependent population. Plus, in the long term enclosure actually benefited rural society by increasing food production output, which was also aided by the Agricultural Revolution, and with the expansion of towns and cities, many found employment opportunities within the factories. Furthermore, with increased mobility and development and spread of individualism, maintaining the common norms and values within a society were not seen as such a major concern. Overall, the majority of problems that rural society faced, including others I have not discussed, were significant for only a short period. Harvest failure on the other hand, and the secondary problems it created, was particularly difficult to overcome and it caused much hardship for many, for an increasing number of years.

24 25

Sharpe, Early Modern England, p.51 P Slack, Impact of Plague in Tudor and Stuart England, (London, Routledge & K Paul, 1985), p.75 26 Dickinson, A Companion to Eighteenth Century Britain, p.144 27 Sharpe, Early Modern England, p.50 28 Hinde, Englands Population, p.111 29 Hinde, Englands Population, p.126

5 Bibliography Bovill, E W, English Country Life: 1780-1830, London, Oxford University Press, 1962 Braddick, M and Walter, J (eds), Negotiating Power in Early Modern Society, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2001 Clarkson, Leslie, Death, Disease and Famine in pre-Industrial England, Dublin, Gill & Macmillan, 1975 Dickinson, H T, A Companion to Eighteenth Century Britain Oxford, Blackwell Pub., 2002 Hinde,Andrew, Englands Population, London, Hodder Education, 2003 Overton, Mark, Re-establishing the Agricultural Revolution, Agricultural History Review, 44, (1998), pp. 1 20 Sharpe, J. A., Early Modern England: A Social History 1550-1760, London, Arnold, 1997 Slack, P, Impact of Plague in Tudor and Stuart England, London, Routledge & K Paul, 1985 Wrightson, Keith, English Society: 1580-1680, London, Hutchinson, 1982

I think this essay went quite well, I particularly like that I was able to construct argument on which problem I thought was most significant. Originally I was just going to go through each problem, quite like a narrative I suppose, but I took the time to think of an argument. I think the area I added on Malthus and the preventative check is quite good, although if I had more words I would have expanded on it and tried to make it much more convincing as I do think that it is a little weak. However, I think it shows that I thought for myself instead of just concentrating on what other historians have said. Overall, I think the essay is not bad, maybe some of the arguments could have been developed but I did have to try and fit everything into 2000 words.