Search

Pages 253-296 of Volume 2 are not available in the electronic version of this thesis due to copyright restrictions. The full version can be consulted at the University of Leicester Library.

By the early nineteenth century, Herefordshire's commons hosted 96 settlements comprising ten or more dwellings. Were they peopled by 'squatters' who had built their shanties illegally on the waste and were the inhabitants a rough, uncivilized people who indulged themselves in vice and profanity of every kind? Contemporary views are understandable given the geographical isolation of these settlements, but they ignore entirely the diversity of settlements encountered as a result of the varied topography and types of agriculture practised within the county's five principal regions. Except in the south-west corner of the county, farmers themselves relied little on the exercise of common rights – an important prerequisite for settlement growth. Conversely, this mixed agricultural economy created a wide range of employment opportunities; commons settlements were marginally placed between woodlands and fields, creating a rhythmic cycle of seasonal employment for male commoners. In contrast, women's lives were structured around the spatial organization of domestic tasks and in particular, access to and control of fire and water. Threatening to undermine this cohesive intermeshing of complimentary roles in squatter society was the problem of tenurial insecurity, although obsessions with the origin of squatter housing have tended to obscure the increasingly complex web of tenurial interrelationships in which the squatter, freeholder, copyholder, vestry and manorial lord were entangled. Tenurially, settlements tended to develop along three distinctive paths; some became enveloped by large rural estates, illustrated in the case study of Tarrington's commons. More isolated settlements retained a staunch freeholders' presence; in others petty landlords predominated as a result of enclosure and proximity to market centres. This classificatory model becomes a useful tool for analysing nonconformist tendencies. Each type of settlement, though, should be viewed in the context of a developing capitalist economy, which ultimately is responsible for giving birth to, and destroying, squatter communities.

The idea that mariners have a distinctive tradition, generated by a view of the world not open to other men, is an old one. "They that go down to the sea in ships, that do business in great waters; they see the works of the Lord and his wonders in the Deep", says one of the Psalms; emphasizing not only the sense of separation which went with the occupation of seafarer, but a unique proximity to God, which made the sea in general, and fishermen in particular, important images for the medieval church. Even at sea, as the story of Jonah reminded men, nobody could flee from God; while fishing, as James I is said to have pointed out, was "the Apostles' own calling". Educated nineteenth century commentators, less concerned with the dignity this gave to mariners, often regarded them as similar to the primitive societies contemporary explorers encountered overseas. Ebenezer Mather, an Anglican missionary, took the gospel to fishermen at sea, after discovering them to be "the wildest men I had ever encountered". The naturalist, J.G. Bertram, who was principally interested in the classification and habits of fish, wrote of the marriage customs and superstitions of the "fisher folk" he encountered on the Scottish coast, as curious anecdotes, and at times almost seems to have relegated the majority of fishermen to the status of uneducated savages: "I have examined every intelligent fisherman I have met within the last ten years," he complained, "numbering above one hundred, and few have any real knowledge regarding the habits of the fish which it is their business to capture."

This study examines the extent to which innovative forces altered Gloucester's character in the period 1820-1851, a time of accelerating change. The analysis is developed at three inter-related levels: the town itself, its regional functions and its more distant relationships. Some comparisons with other middle ranking county towns contribute to the assessment of Gloucester's experience. The growth of Cheltenham and the Gloucester Berkeley Canal were major factors. The opening chapters consider firstly the town's sphere of influence and wider regional connections, its main physical features and development and lastly, the growth of its population and the character of its occupational structure. The next four chapters are concerned with key sectors of the urban economy, beginning with the markets and inns. Then follow the more dynamic sectors which comprised the retailers of the central shopping area, mercantile and related interests dependent on shipping and lastly that of the professions, in particular law, medicine and banking. The eighth chapter establishes the relationship between these sectors, the urban population more generally and the city corporation, and the influence of its traditions. The 1851 Census Enumerators' Returns and the leading local newspaper were the principal documentary sources for the study, extensively amplified by local directories and municipal records. Much additional material came from wills and probate valuations, parish and business records. While occupational patterns and institutional functions changed slowly, the most vigorous growth occurred in mercantile activity. This was the main catalyst for developments in industry, railway construction and banking. Newcomers to the town were prominent among leading promoters. The greater economic strength more than compensated for losses to Cheltenham. It enhanced the city's regional importance, developed closer ties with Birmingham and enlarged its distant connections in this country and abroad.

This thesis sets out to discover the principal facts concerning the economy of Carlisle in this 150 years and to try to explain them and their significance. A wide range of sources has been used, including: the administrative papers, court records and accounts of the corporation of Carlisle; gild records; parish registers; state papers, taxation records and other documents generated by central government; the records of the Dean and Chapter of Carlisle; and probate records. Only the latter covered the bulk of the period. Carlisle was the largest town in Cumberland until about 1690, when it was overtaken by Whitehaven. The city's population reached a peak of just under 2,000 in 1597, then fell, but climbed back to 2,000 by 1700. Its economy rested on its functions as garrison, county, cathedral and market town, but tanning was important before the Civil War. The three special functions gave the town an unusually high proportion of lawyers, clergymen and soldiers among its inhabitants, but otherwise its occupational structure was essentially that of a market town, and its economic hinterland was surprisingly restricted. Specialisation within trades was limited and secondary occupations were very common, especially farming and victualling. Carlisle was the most important town of a poor region, and this poverty was reflected in the town's economy, especially in the lack of specialisation in the town's economy as a whole and in individual economic activity. It benefited little from the economic changes that affected early-modern Cumberland, or from the diminution of Border violence, and the early seventeenth century may have been a period of economic difficulty. It was small in comparison to other towns of similar status and relatively poor, with old-fashioned housing. Carlisle was economically backward, and insofar as its economy was typical of small towns, reveals a weakness of the pre-industrial economy.