The enclosure movement made a dramatic impact on British agriculture. The enclosures resulted in a period of land reclamation that opened up thousands of new acres for the growing of crops. This reclamation included the draining of wetlands, the opening up of wastelands and moorland for cultivation (perhaps as much as 30% of arable area of Great Britain from 1650 to 1800), and continuing deforestation, a trend that reduced British woodlands, although differently from county to county, from 10% of the land in the 14th century to just 5% in the early 1800s. The enclosure movement also introduced new crop rotation practices, stimulated regional specialization, and resulted in an increase in agricultural output. The real impetus for many of the agricultural changes came about as a result of the wave of agricultural techniques and advances led by energetic large landowners. Of particular importance were the innovations in Norfolk. The so-called Norfolk
System entailed applying a series of interrelated measures on the enclosed farm. These included the use of sandy soils of marl and clay to aerate the land and improve drainage, a four-crop rotation: turnips, barley, clover, and wheat, a shift from sheep production to grain and cattle, and the employment of tenants under long leases on the larger scale holdings. The 18th century witnessed the spread of the Norfolk approach to other parts of Great Britain and the old three-crop rotation cycle of winter crop, spring crop, and fallow withered away. The result was a tenfold increase in the land values in Norfolk in the period 1730 to 1760.6
Traditionally, several individuals have been associated with the forward-thinking and new techniques associated with the changes in British agriculture in the 18th century. More recent interpretation has downplayed their role significantly, but their names are worthy of mention, even if they merely represent the collective trend that had begun to modernize British agriculture. One such figure was Jethro Tull. He was educated at Cambridge and studied law in London. However, for health reasons he left his study of law and collaborated in agriculture with his father, who was a member of the landed gentry. In the early 18th century seeds were distributed (or drilled) into furrows by hand. Tull observed that the usual heavy sowing densities were not efficient, so he instructed his farm laborers to drill at somewhat precise low densities. He held the theory that plants obtained their nutrition through tiny particles that he named atoms. Tull believed that the persistent pulverizing of the soil through working it to greater depths would bring on better nutrition of plants. His agrarian laborers apparently did not follow his instructions to his satisfaction, so out of necessity he invented a machine to standardize the work. Although he was not the first person to dabble with a mechanized approach to planting seeds, his device was sophisticated enough to distribute the seeds evenly and at the precise depth required and then cover them with soil. The key aspect of his apparatus was to eliminate a major portion of the waste inherent in the previous seeding technique and to make the crop easier to weed.
After relocating and traveling in Europe to study techniques on the continent, he revised his machine and approach. He believed that he had eliminated the need for a heavy manure application and supposedly grew wheat in the same area for more than a dozen years without using manure as fertilizer. Skeptics believe that the soil remained fertile and productive because the device prevented weeds from taking control. His ideas did not take immediate root. In 1731 he published Horse Holding Husbandry, a work that provided specifics regarding his discoveries, although most observers believe that he overstated its importance. His difficult personality and the controversy generated by his book delayed widespread adoption of his approach until the 19th century. By that time, several other seed drill inventions and improvements had appeared. Nonetheless, his name has remained affixed to the development of the seed drill in generations of textbooks.7
Another important agrarian pioneer was Robert Bakewell. Born into a tenant farmer family in Leicestershire, he obtained enough means to travel in Europe to study farming methods. After his father’s death in 1760, Bakewell inherited the family farm, which consisted of one quarter arable land and the remainder for grasses and grazing. Tradition states that he began experiments with manure fertilization in the grassland portion and conducted a major effort to irrigate the area by diverting river water and using canals to bring water to these fields. However, it was his interest in stock breeding that brought him notoriety. Until this time, farmers kept livestock of both sexes together in the same fields, a practice that resulted in random breeding and the creation of a variety of breeds possessing unique but often random traits. Bakewell decided to separate the males from the females and then forced the mating to occur deliberately and specifically. This approach known as the ‘‘in and in’’ or inbreeding meant that he obtained livestock that generally possessed both fixed and exaggerated characteristics that he deemed desirable. His first experiments were with an established Lincolnshire breed of sheep that he transformed into the New Leicester. This larger breed possessed delicate bones, a high quality fleece, and fatty fore-quarters. This latter trait was important as the British had a taste for fatty shoulder mutton to grace their tables. Bake-well also hired out his best rams to other farmers so that they might improve their stock. He also founded the Dishley Society, an organization with the mission to maintain the standards of the New Leicester sheep breed he had developed. The result was highly visible. In 1710 the average sheep sold at the major London market weighed approximately forty pounds. By the end of the century the weight had doubled.8 Unfortunately, following his death, the taste in meat changed and his New Leicester sheep died out, although the later breeds maintained a lineage founded in his sheep. ‘‘Just as Boulton produced buttons for the people, not the nobility, so Bakewell said he did not breed sheep for gentlemen’s tables but for the masses.’’9 Bakewell’s interests turned to cattle breeding. He observed that the Longhorn breed ate less and put on more weight and thus were the best meat producers. He applied the ‘‘in and in’’ technique to cattle with success but only for a short while. As with the New Leicester sheep, the fashion in meat consumption changed, and Charles Colling and his brother developed the Shorthorn breed that supplanted Bakewell’s Longhorn cattle. Some critics have claimed that Bakewell has received more credit than he was due, because his new breeds barely survived his lifetime. Other commentators, while conceding that point, emphasize that his innovations in stock breeding influenced later practices and led to more meat for consumption by the general public.
Arthur Young (see Document 13) is also considered a controversial 18th century agriculture reformer. In 1759 he inherited his father’s estate in Suffolk and began a series of agricultural experiments in order to increase cultivation. His real contribution was not in any specific improvements but rather in his keen observation and analysis of changes taking place around him in agriculture in the late 18th and early 19th centuries. He traveled widely in Great Britain and France and commented on developments in these countries. Beginning in 1770, Young wrote extensively for the next four decades, publishing works on experimental agriculture, agrarian developments in British counties and Ireland, and interesting commentaries on the state of French agriculture on the eve of the Revolution.10 His writings were very popular, quickly ran through many editions, and were translated into several continental languages. His forty-five-volume Annals of Agriculture was in print from 1784 until the early 19th century. Young had a staunch belief in individual property rights, but he also possessed an open mind. He originally was a supporter of the enclosure movement but later lamented that it had put great stress on the agrarian lower classes. In one account he wrote about the wretched circumstances of one of the families dispossessed of its land. The scene he described was one of a poor, ill, and starving mother, lying uncomfortably on a bed too small for her frame, and her dead infant in a cradle beside her. His works are also laced with pithy quotes that speak of his close attachment to the land. For example, ‘‘Great farmers are the soul of the Norfolk culture.’’11 After returning from France, his reputation led to his appointment as the Secretary of the Board of Agriculture in Great Britain. In this role he supervised the collection and preparation of agricultural surveys of the British counties. Unfortunately, in later life he experienced blindness brought about by cataracts and worsened by an unsuccessful operation to cure the ailment. Some critics have questioned the data he collected and the conclusions that he drew from his analysis, often referring to him as a charlatan or a mere scribbler. However, despite the flaws and inaccuracies found in his works, Young’s importance rests in his insistence on keen observation of the conditions of the rural countryside and the collection of a compendium of data related to cultivation practices, livestock, and productivity of the land. These methods provided an early model for the application of statistical analysis to the changing nature of agriculture over time.12
The increase in arable land had several important impacts. Over the space of several decades, an increasing variety of crops such as asparagus, artichokes, and fruits spread across the landscape. That development, coupled with falling food prices, ensured that even the average person could afford a more diverse and healthy diet and contributed to the rapid growth in population. In addition, the new forage crops of alfalfa (lucerne), turnips, and clover supplemented the raising of hay and resulted in higher yields and the reclamation of former marginal pasture lands for productive farming. The turnip was the most important crop in this system. The turnip reduced the fallow land that formerly had been used to clear the land of weeds by plowing. However, crops of turnips planted in rows could be hoed to remove weeds while growing. In 1700 fallow land was 20% of arable land, but that percentage dropped to about 4% over the space of the next two centuries. Fallow land had been used in the past to allow time for the soil to replenish itself and to control perennial weeds. Fallows began to be replaced using crops such as turnips and clover, which accomplished the same end and provided additional nitrogen-rich fodder crops. Manure produced by the animals grazing on these crops returned a better fertilizer to the soil. In addition, higher yield crops, such as wheat and barley, replaced the lower yielding rye. In the 18th century, British wheat yields increased by a quarter and were 40% greater per acre than that of the French. An important contribution to the improvement of cereal yields was nitrogen, a property that farmers certainly did not know about until later in the 19th century. However, their practices indicate a growing feeding of nitrogen to the soil. The collection of manure from animal stalls and its application to needed areas was one means to increase nitrogen. The long-held practice of growing legumes continued to contribute to nitrogen enrichment. And, the introduction of red and white clover in the 17th century improved the amount of nitrogen in the soils used for cereal crops. It is estimated that in Norfolk the use of legumes and introduction of clover may have tripled the rate of nitrogen found in the soil from 1700 to 1850. The significance of this new approach was that it was sustainable, and thus the increase in food output could be maintained almost indefinitely, one key reason why Britain’s burgeoning population could be easily fed even though the agrarian work force had dwindled.13
World History
