Hobsbawm, E. J. and Rude, George (1975) Captain Swing. New York, NY: W.W.
Norton and Company, Inc., 384 pp.
Captain Swing is an enjoyable collaboration between E. J. Hobsbawm and George Rude that depicts the social history of the English agricultural wage-laborers’ uprising of 1830. According to Hobsbawm and Rude, historiography of the laborers’ rising of 1830 is negligible. Most of what is known by the general public comes from J. L. And Barbara Hammond’s The Village Laborer published in 1911. They consider this an exceedingly valuable work, but state that the Hammonds oversimplified events in order to dramatize them. They placed too much emphasis on enclosure, oversimplified both the nature and prevalence of the “Speenhamland System” of poor relief, and neglected the range and scope of the uprising. Hobsbawm and Rude do not claim to present any new data, and believe that the Hammonds will still be read for enjoyment, but believe that by asking different questions, they can shed new light on the social history of the movement. Therefore, this book tries to “describe and analyze the most impressive episode in the English farm-labourers’ long and doomed struggle against poverty and degradation.”
In the nineteenth century, England had no peasantry to speak of in the sense that other nations did. Where families who owned or occupied their own small plot of land and cultivated it themselves, apart from work on their lord’s farms, farmed most of Europe, England’s “peasants” were agricultural wage-laborers. As such, both tithes and taxes hit them hard. Lords and farmers were also against tithes and taxes and tolerated or even welcomed some outcry against them. Most county leaders in 1830 agreed with the laborers, but the government in London did not.
Further, enclosure eliminated the common lands whose use had helped the very poor to live. As a result, the relationship between farmers and laborers changed to a “purely market relationship between employer and proletarian.” At the same time, work once done by annual servants was given over to wage labor. Farmers were driven by income rather than social concerns and it was cheaper to pay a small wage for all positions and let laborers pay their own living out of it than to provide them room and board, however minimal.
The laborers were not revolutionary, however. They did not wish to overturn the traditional social order. They merely demanded the restoration of their meager rights within it.
This means that men and women were entitled to a particular job and they were obliged to do their work. Agricultural societies assigned work in divergent ways and this helped them because there was increase in productivity.
In the midst of the chaos it created, the Black Death weakened the archaic system of manorialism by causing an increase in the incomes of peasants. Manorialism was an economic system where a large class of serfs worked in the fields of the nobles in exchange for a small share of the crops. Due to the outbreak of the plague, however, there were not enough serfs for this approach to remain viable. The death of many serfs due to the Black Death meant that the ones who remained were able to ask for larger shares of the crops since their services were rare and thus more valuable. Further adding to the increase, many peasants whose requests were denied would often s...
In response to intervention, thousands of groups of people became defiant. Laborers living off the bare minimum often assembled into organized groups to enforce their demands upon the government, making a notable push for reform (D) while educated men such as Henry Demarest Lloyd promoted virtue, not land, as the ideal focus of government (B). Dissatisfaction continued within the middle class. As new industrial machines emerged, designed for mass product...
Despite being celebrated for its industrial achievements, the very foundation by which society was predicated on in the Gilded Age crumbled as labor unrest grew. This sense of discontent on the part of laborers is demonstrated through the Haymarket Affair of 1866. Among those tried for the crime was August Spies, who in his “Address of August Spies,” compromises his own life by persistently undermining the legitimacy of the State to emphasize the determination of the collective for which he views himself as a “representative.” In his attempt to illuminate the injustices of the State and foreshadow the unremitting turmoil that will emerge with his murder, Spies simultaneously showcases the divisions within society at the time. Consequently, because it is a product of its time period, the “Address of August Spies” can be used not only as a means of understanding the Haymarket Affair but the dynamics of society as a whole.
“In the first years of peacetime, following the Revolutionary War, the future of both the agrarian and commercial society appeared threatened by a strangling chain of debt which aggravated the depressed economy of the postwar years”.1 This poor economy affected almost everyone in New England especially the farmers. For years these farmers, or yeomen as they were commonly called, had been used to growing just enough for what they needed and grew little in surplus. As one farmer explained “ My farm provides me and my family with a good living. Nothing we wear, eat, or drink was purchased, because my farm provides it all.”2 The only problem with this way of life is that with no surplus there was no way to make enough money to pay excessive debts. For example, since farmer possessed little money the merchants offered the articles they needed on short-term credit and accepted any surplus farm goods on a seasonal basis for payment. However if the farmer experienced a poor crop, shopkeepers usually extended credit and thereby tied the farmer to their businesses on a yearly basis.3 During a credit crisis, the gradual disintegration of the traditional culture became more apparent. During hard times, merchants in need of ready cash withdrew credit from their yeomen customers and called for the repayment of loans in hard cash. Such demands showed the growing power of the commercial elite.4 As one could imagine this brought much social and economic unrest to the farmers of New England. Many of the farmers in debt were dragged into court and in many cases they were put into debtors prison. Many decided to take action: The farmers waited for the legal due process as long as them could. The Legislature, also know as the General Court, took little action to address the farmers complaints. 5 “So without waiting for General Court to come back into session to work on grievances as requested, the People took matters into their own hands.”6 This is when the idea for the Rebellion is decided upon and the need for a leader was eminent.
One of the reasons the serfs led an uprise against the government in the early 1520s was a wanting for economic equality. In a letter written from a Count to a Duke, describes the attacks the peasants were planning and executing in which they attacked the houses of the nobility (Doc 11). The peasants started with the most wealthy individuals and stealing possessions from wealthy areas (like consuming all that was available in the monasteries) and then continued to attack other rick noblemen is descending order of wealth. This systematic approach of attacking the wealthy, and the wealthiest first, shows the dislike by the peasants for the economic system at the time. In addition, in an article written by peasants, called Twelve Articles of the Swabian Peasants, the peasants demanded better compensations for the services they provided their lords (Doc 2). They believed that they were being severely underpaid and were suffering conditions almost equal of that to a slave. They believe that they are simply demanding what is, in their opinion, just. On another instance, in 1525, in a letter written to the Archbishop of Wurzburg by an unknown source, the peasants demand a wealth redistribution (Doc 8). Lorenz Fries, the chief advisor to the Archbishop, discusses that the secret lett...
In the Middle Ages, three distinctive kinds of peasants existed: the serfs, slaves and the freemen. However, the majority of the peasant society consisted of the serfs (Gilberts para. 1). Serfs made up only half of the population for peasants in the 14th century, but during the mid-11th century, an astounding ninety percent of peasants, in distinct areas, were attributed to serfs. A serf was under the command of his lord and had to abide by his rules (Singman 8). He then contained absolutely no political rights (Gilberts para. 2). Alike the serfs, slaves were permitted to be sold and purchased, but, in fact, buyers of serfs did not have full ownership over them (Singman 8). If a serf happened to flee and stay hidden and unrestricted for a total of one year, he could then declare himself a freeman (Gilberts para. 2). Freemen were, indeed, permitted to roam around at liberty and own tiny pieces of land (Gilberts para. 1).
A large population of people had just become free but the real matter at hand centered on survival. Since they were not yet legal citizens, the freed slaves still had to rely heavily on those around them and such solution to their economic plight was sharecropping. At first, this concept would have been beneficial to freed slaves and their quest for freedom but it quickly became an obstacle. From the textbook The Enduring Vision, sharecropping is “the most widespread arrangement, evolved as a compromise. Under the sharecropping system, landowners’ subdivided large plantations into farms of thirty to fifty acres, which they rented to freedmen….Freedmen preferred sharecropping to wage labor because it represented a step toward independence…Planters often spoke of sharecropping as a concession, but they benefitted, too. They retained power over tenants” (Boyer, pg. 485, The Crises of Reconstruction). In spite of this feeling of independence, tenants were still at the mercy of the landlords because they could be evicted at a moment’s notice. In addition to the possibility of expulsion, many farmers became trapped within their contracts with the landowner demanding more each year. In some cases, the farmers never were able to get of debt. Such unfairness in modern times could be avoided but with little legislation in place to protect freedmen, many suffered. In spite of programs like the Freedmen’s Bureau (program dedicated to helping freed blacks become established) and guaranteed wages through black codes, there was not much impact on the free man’s everyday life until the latter half of the 1860’s with the passage of the fourteenth
The Inhuman working conditions of the Industrial Revolution clearly demonstrates the suffering of the working class. For example, The Ashton Chronicle by John Birley 1849, “Frank once beat me till he frightened himself, he though he has killed me” this describes the brutal beatings from not doing work
From the late 18th century to the mid 19th century, the economy in England was transformed from an agricultural to a manufacturing –based economy. In 1801, agriculture provided employment for 36% of the British population. By 1851, only 10% of the British population was employed in agriculture, while over 40% was employed in industry (Hopkins, 36). As a direct result of this transformation, a surplus of jobs were created and displaced farming families moved in to fill them. Factory and Mine owners exploited the situation by offering families a means to make more money, by putting their children to work. Industry profited from this arrangement by saving money, since child labor was more “cost effective”. According to one historian, Clark Nardinelli, “in 1835 56,000 children under the age of thirteen were working in textile factories alone. By 1874, the number of child laborers in the market hit its peak with over 122,000 children between the ages of 10 and thirteen working in textile factories (4).”
After the devastation left from the Civil War, many field owners looked for new ways to replace their former slaves with field hands for farming and production use. From this need for new field hands came sharecroppers, a “response to the destitution and disorganized” agricultural results of the Civil War (Wilson 29). Sharecropping is the working of a piece of land by a tenant in exchange for a portion of the crops that they bring in for their landowners. These farmhands provided their labor, while the landowners provided living accommodations for the worker and his family, along with tools, seeds, fertilizers, and a portion of the crops that they had harvested that season. A sharecropper had “no entitlement to the land that he cultivated,” and was forced “to work under any conditions” that his landowner enforced (Wilson 798). Many landowners viewed sharecropping as a way to elude the now barred possession of slaves while still maintaining field hands for labor in an inexpensive and ample manner. The landowners watched over the sharecroppers and their every move diligently, with harsh supervision, and pressed the sharecroppers to their limits, both mentally and physically. Not only were the sharecroppers just given an average of one-fourth of their harvest, they had “one of the most inadequate incomes in the United States, rarely surpassing more than a few hundred dollars” annually (Wilson 30). Under such trying conditions, it is not hard to see why the sharecroppers struggled to maintain a healthy and happy life, if that could even be achieved. Due to substandard conditions concerning sharecropper’s clothing, insufficient food supplies, and hazardous health issues, sharecroppers competed on the daily basis to stay alive on what little their landowners had to offer them.
The ‘Proclamation of Serfs’ given at Saint Petersburg on March 3, 1861 by Alexander II, states “[Peasants] should understand that by acquiring property and greater freedom to dispose of their possessions, they have an obligation to society and to themselves to live up to the letter of the new law by a loyal and judicious use of the rights which are now granted to them.” He adds: “We confidently expect that the freed serfs, on the eve of a new future which is opening to them, will appreciate and recognize the considerable sacrifices which the nobility has made on their behalf.”
The problem with society during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries was the equality of all persons was few and far between. The bourgeoisie was in control of all the power and the proletariats were basically under their control. It was as if the bourgeoisie “originated out of the old medieval peasant class, in opposition to the medieval titled aristocracy.” [ii] They had taken over everything; the oppressed class lived by their rules and ways of life. Their way of life was not a happy one; family was based upon money instead of love. “Capital developed in the same proportion as the class of laborers developed.” ii Life then seemed simple for those living the life of the bourgeoisie, b...
With the gradual advancements of society in the 1800’s came new conflicts to face. England, the leading country of technology at the time, seemed to be in good economic standing as it profited from such products the industrial revolution brought. This meant the need for workers increased which produced jobs but often resulted in the mistreatment of its laborers. Unfortunately the victims targeted were kids that were deprived of a happy childhood. A testimony by a sub-commissioner of mines in 1842 titled Women Miners in the English Coal Pits and The Sadler Report (1832), an interview of various kids, shows the deplorable conditions these kids were forced to face.
As a result of enclosure movement, many farmers moved into cities and became factory workers. During the agricultural revolution, wealthy landowners bought land that was formerly worked by village farmers and forced the farmers to give up farming and move into cities. These farmers faced many difficulties during their first year living in the city since jobs were hard to find. Factory owners hired them because they knew that they could pay low wages or reduce them if workers were late or their business was bad and fine or threaten to fire them if they were not paying attention to their work at all times (Doc A). This exam...