Economy, Trade and Empire
How significant were developments in agriculture for the growth of the
Stuart economy in the years 1625-88?
Developments in agriculture ensured that agriculture dominated the economy during the years 1625-88
because new techniques and the development of national markets ensured that agriculture became much
more efficient. However, the growth of London also was significant for economic growth because it was the
centre of trade and banking and insurance industries. Agricultural production ultimately facilitated all other
aspects of the economy such as the growth of London and so was foundational for the growth of the Stuart
economy.
Agricultural techniques
Created a more efficient system of agriculture which increased efficiency, although gradually LT
Enclosure: Created a higher yield and ensured crop rotation was not duplicated. Increased
efficiency. This created large scale farms, facilitating growth of London
This created a shift towards private land ownership and commercial farming, contributing to the
development of a market-based economy.
However: This was a gradual process, parts of England e.g. West country were already enclosed by
1625 and others were not yet enclosed e.g. Oxfordshire. T4 also not widespread.
Crop rotation: There was a growing awareness of the need to leave fields fallow.
In 1420s 7 million was used for arable farming whilst 3 million was left fallow. By 1700, 9M used
1.8m fallow. Also increased efficiency.
An increase in literacy levels enabled many to read about new agricultural techniques such as the
work of Walter Blith.
In the 1640s agricultural production exceeded all other European countries other than Holland.
Paragraph 2: National markets, specialised farming
The growth of the population of towns resulted in an increase in demand for food.
Market gardens specialising in fruit + veg facilitated the growth of towns and cities such as London.
The growth of transport infrastructure such as roads and the dredging and widening of rivers
encouraged the use of the Severn, Ouse and Thames to transport goods.
Specialised farming increased efficiency because certain areas were more suited to different types
of farming e.g. South East was drier so more suited to arable farming whilst the North/West was
wetter and hilly so better for livestock.
Capital investment
Impact: Agricultural developments needed investment in order for farmers to take risks and
experiment with different techniques. So productivity increase
The higher gentry + aristocracy to invested in large-scale modernisation
They could buy land from neighbouring farms, enclose it and invest in new crops.
Post-1650: population began to slow and deflation meant that large landowners could improve
estates relatively cheaply bc labour + materials affordable
E.g. In South Midlands, From 1600-1700 agricultural land that was part of large estates over 100
acres increased from 32.2%- 53.6%
In East Anglia, some farms over 500 acres in size however small family farms still outnumbered
large ‘capital farms’ but were mostly in pastoral North + South West moorland
Lowland plains in Midlands, East Anglia + South East who specialised in wheat and livestock
production were able to invest heavily.
With the expansion of size, owners leased out sections to tenants. Was often more profitable to
work as a large tenant farmer than small land owner.
Delegating work improved production bc rent they charged were high + tenants were expected to
maintain buildings, hedges, fields at own expense
This resulted in tenants specialising + producing what suited local conditions to meet rent.
Landlords would offer loans to help them modernise.
However: Marxist historians believed that this began the development of an early capitalist society
and the group that stood to benefit was the gentry.
This was because workers such as the tenants were able to be exploited.
, The cloth trade
Evaluation: The cloth trade formed a major aspect of economy, especially in 1625 and the early 17th
century, however by 1688, it had begun to decline. The development of agriculture was more significant
because it was gradually growing, and formed the foundation of the economy.
The domestic system
Point: Maximised efficiency
Work was carried out at home which meant that it was free from taxation or regulation.
Maximised efficiency because women and children could contribute.
Regional variation ensured efficiency e.g. West country produced ‘broadcloth’ that would be sent to
the low countries.
Opportunities for social advancement provided incentives for merchants who could, in theory make
enough to marry into landowning families.
London exported £1.5 million textiles 1660s
The monetary value of exports multiplied 15x 1485-1714.
However: The decline of Antwerp declined the cloth market, and rival products entered the market
which reduced exports.
In 1640, cloth accounted for 92% of exports out of London, reduced to 72% in 1700.
Impact of protestant immigration
Point: Brought new skills that expanded the trade
Dutch immigrants were skilled + trained in new continental methods and therefore expanded the
cloth trade.
In Colchester, those employed in the textile industry rose from 26.4% 1619 to 40% 1699
Migrants brought new technology such as the frame knitting machine which sped up cloth
production.
The Dutch in East Anglia introduced worsted draperies that were versatile, cheap + appealed to a
wider market.
However: These groups faced resentment from natives e.g. in Colchester some attempted to expel
immigrants from the town, but this was ineffective and did not significantly slow production.
The growth of London
Evaluation:
London was the economic, political capital of England, therefore its growth provided the basis of economic
developments.
Mid-17th century London became the largest city of Western Europe, population of around 400,000
increased to 575,000 by 1700.
The concentration of skilled and educated workers boosted economic growth.
There was an increase in migration of peasants to towns and wealthy landowners who wanted
favour in royal court.
This was facilitated by the growth in agriculture which was needed to feed the population.
Shipments of grain brought to the city increased from 500,000 quarters 1605 to 1,150,000 1661
The hub of the European market relied on the port of the city.
The growth of insurance ensured that London was became the leading insurance market of the
world which encouraged merchants to take more risks.
Transport infrastructure such as roads and shipping was centred around London e.g. Thames.
The East India Company, Levant Company, an Muscovy Company, chartered trading companies
were based in London. Established as the centre for international trade because of these
companies and the port of the city.
The European market relied on the port of the city.
Banking and insurance
How significant were developments in agriculture for the growth of the
Stuart economy in the years 1625-88?
Developments in agriculture ensured that agriculture dominated the economy during the years 1625-88
because new techniques and the development of national markets ensured that agriculture became much
more efficient. However, the growth of London also was significant for economic growth because it was the
centre of trade and banking and insurance industries. Agricultural production ultimately facilitated all other
aspects of the economy such as the growth of London and so was foundational for the growth of the Stuart
economy.
Agricultural techniques
Created a more efficient system of agriculture which increased efficiency, although gradually LT
Enclosure: Created a higher yield and ensured crop rotation was not duplicated. Increased
efficiency. This created large scale farms, facilitating growth of London
This created a shift towards private land ownership and commercial farming, contributing to the
development of a market-based economy.
However: This was a gradual process, parts of England e.g. West country were already enclosed by
1625 and others were not yet enclosed e.g. Oxfordshire. T4 also not widespread.
Crop rotation: There was a growing awareness of the need to leave fields fallow.
In 1420s 7 million was used for arable farming whilst 3 million was left fallow. By 1700, 9M used
1.8m fallow. Also increased efficiency.
An increase in literacy levels enabled many to read about new agricultural techniques such as the
work of Walter Blith.
In the 1640s agricultural production exceeded all other European countries other than Holland.
Paragraph 2: National markets, specialised farming
The growth of the population of towns resulted in an increase in demand for food.
Market gardens specialising in fruit + veg facilitated the growth of towns and cities such as London.
The growth of transport infrastructure such as roads and the dredging and widening of rivers
encouraged the use of the Severn, Ouse and Thames to transport goods.
Specialised farming increased efficiency because certain areas were more suited to different types
of farming e.g. South East was drier so more suited to arable farming whilst the North/West was
wetter and hilly so better for livestock.
Capital investment
Impact: Agricultural developments needed investment in order for farmers to take risks and
experiment with different techniques. So productivity increase
The higher gentry + aristocracy to invested in large-scale modernisation
They could buy land from neighbouring farms, enclose it and invest in new crops.
Post-1650: population began to slow and deflation meant that large landowners could improve
estates relatively cheaply bc labour + materials affordable
E.g. In South Midlands, From 1600-1700 agricultural land that was part of large estates over 100
acres increased from 32.2%- 53.6%
In East Anglia, some farms over 500 acres in size however small family farms still outnumbered
large ‘capital farms’ but were mostly in pastoral North + South West moorland
Lowland plains in Midlands, East Anglia + South East who specialised in wheat and livestock
production were able to invest heavily.
With the expansion of size, owners leased out sections to tenants. Was often more profitable to
work as a large tenant farmer than small land owner.
Delegating work improved production bc rent they charged were high + tenants were expected to
maintain buildings, hedges, fields at own expense
This resulted in tenants specialising + producing what suited local conditions to meet rent.
Landlords would offer loans to help them modernise.
However: Marxist historians believed that this began the development of an early capitalist society
and the group that stood to benefit was the gentry.
This was because workers such as the tenants were able to be exploited.
, The cloth trade
Evaluation: The cloth trade formed a major aspect of economy, especially in 1625 and the early 17th
century, however by 1688, it had begun to decline. The development of agriculture was more significant
because it was gradually growing, and formed the foundation of the economy.
The domestic system
Point: Maximised efficiency
Work was carried out at home which meant that it was free from taxation or regulation.
Maximised efficiency because women and children could contribute.
Regional variation ensured efficiency e.g. West country produced ‘broadcloth’ that would be sent to
the low countries.
Opportunities for social advancement provided incentives for merchants who could, in theory make
enough to marry into landowning families.
London exported £1.5 million textiles 1660s
The monetary value of exports multiplied 15x 1485-1714.
However: The decline of Antwerp declined the cloth market, and rival products entered the market
which reduced exports.
In 1640, cloth accounted for 92% of exports out of London, reduced to 72% in 1700.
Impact of protestant immigration
Point: Brought new skills that expanded the trade
Dutch immigrants were skilled + trained in new continental methods and therefore expanded the
cloth trade.
In Colchester, those employed in the textile industry rose from 26.4% 1619 to 40% 1699
Migrants brought new technology such as the frame knitting machine which sped up cloth
production.
The Dutch in East Anglia introduced worsted draperies that were versatile, cheap + appealed to a
wider market.
However: These groups faced resentment from natives e.g. in Colchester some attempted to expel
immigrants from the town, but this was ineffective and did not significantly slow production.
The growth of London
Evaluation:
London was the economic, political capital of England, therefore its growth provided the basis of economic
developments.
Mid-17th century London became the largest city of Western Europe, population of around 400,000
increased to 575,000 by 1700.
The concentration of skilled and educated workers boosted economic growth.
There was an increase in migration of peasants to towns and wealthy landowners who wanted
favour in royal court.
This was facilitated by the growth in agriculture which was needed to feed the population.
Shipments of grain brought to the city increased from 500,000 quarters 1605 to 1,150,000 1661
The hub of the European market relied on the port of the city.
The growth of insurance ensured that London was became the leading insurance market of the
world which encouraged merchants to take more risks.
Transport infrastructure such as roads and shipping was centred around London e.g. Thames.
The East India Company, Levant Company, an Muscovy Company, chartered trading companies
were based in London. Established as the centre for international trade because of these
companies and the port of the city.
The European market relied on the port of the city.
Banking and insurance
