Respond to the following sets of questions (each with a 8 sentence, minimum, answer) below:
-Who were the authors of these texts (make reasoned speculations)? What kind of people were they (status, identity, etc.)? When were these texts written? What kind of texts are they (e.g. diary? pamphlet? law code? secondary scholarly source?)? What are each of these texts “doing” (What are these texts describing? What are these texts arguing? Why would the author write these texts?)?
-Attempt to interpret the data: what is happening to the English economy? to English politics? How do these trends reflect phenomena from the Glorious Revolution onward?
Both of these texts are secondary scholarly sources. The first text written by J. Brewer was written in 1988 and published by Harvard University. Suggesting that at the time he was an expert in his field on the subject of the financial and political happenings in England at this time. The second text was written by D. Hayton and published by the university of Cambridge. This also suggest that he when publishing in 2002 was also an expert in a very similar and closely related field to that of Brewer do to the close relation of each documents context. Both of these text evaluate through various charts and graphs the financial and political happenings in England from the ascension of William III and Mary II to the death of their daughter Anne. The difference between the two texts is that Brewer focuses more on the financial spendings, income, and debt of the government. Where Hanover focuses on the legislative happenings in England including that of voting rates, and the passing of certain legislation. Each of these texts and compilations is written to show the changes over from 1688 through 1714 with an additional glimpse at the time period post the stuarts into the Hanoverian reign and towards the American Revolution.
Based on the data analyzed by Brewer it is very clear that the national spending is increasing greatly over this time period. In the first chart in the given reading section the nations military and total expenditures increase dramatically during the reign of the last Stuart monarchs. However it should be well understood that during this time there is a very small time not engulfed in war. The Nine years war ended in 1697 and the war of Spanish succession picked up barley four years later in 1701 and lasting until 1714 after the ascension of George I and during periods of war national spending is higher than normal. Also during these time periods we see a great increase in the amount of full time employees within the government justifying the increase in spending and showing a stance of economic growth. These factors in company with very little revenue tax income increase during the reign of the last Stuarts shows the economic factors of the nation during this time. However when Brewer takes a closer look at the sources of the net revenue tax income you can see that the ascension of Anne prompted increase in all said sources, excise, land tax, and costumes showing the nations need for more finances during the war of Spanish Succession. However because the national debt does not really increases during this time the claim can still be made the the English economy is in a period of growth. While Brewer spends time focusing on these specific financial happenings Hanover takes a look at the legislative progress during the same time period. Hanover begins by analyzing the working days and the amount of legislative passed. Between the years of 1690-1700 we see the most number of working days. This number only slightly decreases once Anne succeeds William III. Thus we see the most number of legislatives looked at and passed between the years of 1660-1715. This also means that the success rate of legislation actually being passed by parliament has the highest rates during the reigns of William III and Anne, although interestingly the highest success rate of passed legislation was during the reign of Anne. This displays a political environment within England that is ready for and accepting of change. It also shows that the political stability that the nation has long craved and need has finally been found. All of these trends both economically and politically show that the Glorious Revolution was really a beginning of growth and dominance for the nation as a whole one that continued into history despite all challenges and odds.
The first document is a series of graphs, stats, and data collected on various areas of the English government post the Glorious Revolution.This texts goal was to show actual data on money spent in the new English Government to show where the new government was headed. The data tends to show that the new government was very interested in fighting wars and also that English trade began to prosper. It also shows in general that the English Government was getting bigger and more powerful as it shows data showing the increase in jobs within the government. The second text shows data and stats behind Parliament during the years after the Glorious Revolution. It details the amount of english voters who actually took part in electing each new Parliament. It also details the amount of legislation that each Parliament passed which reflects certain events going on in England at the time. Finally it shows data showing the increasing presence of the Whig and Tory parties in England. This is what this text and both texts were trying to explain.
These texts show a growth in the english economy after the Glorious Revolution. The graphs and data in the first text show increases in total tax income and trade during this time period. It also shows an increasing debt which shows an increase in spending in the government. These things show a general increase english economy. The graphs also show that the majority of this money was spent in military and wars. This shows a change in English politics as a strong military and standing army used to be frowned upon by english politics.
The second text shows Parliamentary data and shows data about splits between Whig and Tory constituents and shows that immediately after the Glorious Revolution the Parliament at that time passed a lot of legislation. This shows political fallout from the Glorious Revolution as Parliament began to assert their new found freedom to pass legislation. The two growing parties also came about due to the Glorious Revolution as the new Parliament was majority Whig which led to much division between the two parties. These texts give great insight into what England was like after the Glorious Revolution.
The first text is a secondary source written by J. Brewer concerning the statistics of the financial and military aspects of the British Empire during the late 17th and early 18th century. The second text is also a secondary source, this time concerning the statistics of the political and economic aspects of the British Empire during the late 17th and early 18th Century. These two sources look at relatively the same phenomenon with different viewpoints. Firstly, Brewer is looking at the financing of the Biritsh Empire as a whole, seeing the Empire through a lens of military spending and otherwise. In opposition to this, the second text, written by Hayton, looking more into the aspects of spending via political motivations. Brewer is mainly focused on conveying how government spending within the British Empire spiked during their involvement in their multitude of wars during this period. On the other hand, Hayton focused more on the increased government spending in association with the ideals and power base of Parliament growing as the 17th and 18th century progressed. Both of these texts purpose are to show the increased government involvement and the development of modern governmental spending systems as we see today in most democracies and republics throughout the world.
These pieces of data show the same trend. This shows the increased power of Parliament’s control over Britain’s monetary base. Parliament now had the power to control the Government budget in England however they wanted, as seen in the time which Parliamentary monetary interests were growing in power, and as was Parliament’s decisions to involve themselves in various wars in order to expand their empire. This is directly indicative of English Politics at the time. As a result of the glorious revolution, the Monarch had little to no power to both levy laws and make the important decisions on where the government spending should lie. These texts show a direct relationship between the Parliamentary ideals of the glorious revolution and the loss of Monarchical power in Britain of the time.
The first text is written by an author named John Brewer, and details the financial events that led to England becoming a world power to be reckoned with. The excerpt is from a book called The Sinews of Power, which was released in 1990. It is a secondary scholarly source. His data mostly describes how in every succeeding war in which Britain participated, more money was spent, more debt was incurred, and more soldiers went to war. I believe the point of this data is to display that emerging as a world power comes with great financial costs. The second text is an excerpt from The House of Commons, which details the constituencies contested at elections in England and Wales. This text attempts to show that the 1710 election was the most contentious in the span of 1690-1713, amongst a variety of other political data points.
The former of the two texts reflects that as Britain becomes more involved in conflict, it incurs more debt and increases its spending. For example, in the years 1690 and 1790, the military expenditure skyrockets from 12 million to 28 million. The debt incurred increases from 2 million to 10 million in that same time frame. Administrative department job enrollment also increased greatly as Britain continued to wage war. These fiscally draining aspects of combat came at a price, of course. Income from taxes increased from roughly 2 million during the Nine Years War to just under 20 million at the start of the American War. The latter of the two texts describes political polarization in the mid 1600s (especially between Whigs and Tories) and displays an increase in bills attempted to be passed. The overall trends reflect themes of an increasing sense of imperialism in England, as well as an increasingly divided parliament.
The first text is a secondary source written by John Brewer, that shows the financial and militaristic details of the Enlgish empire in the late 17th century and early 18th century. The data shows how the government was choosing to spend its money. What these numbers show us is that England was beginning to establish itself as a growing world power. Just as England was spending more on its military, trade began to flourish. The second text is also a secondary source that examines the role of Parliament after the Glorious Revolution, how many people were voting in elections, and the legislation that was signed into law. The second text paints a clear picture of the massive spending done by Parliament on the various wars that Britain was engaged in at the time. Both of these sources provide insight into the modernization of England and the beginnings of what would become the largest empire in the world.
Both texts show a growing English economy in the wake of the Glorious revolution. Also evident is a clear boom in government spending coupled with the countries ballooning national debt. A change in who controlled the economy and spending of the government ushered in a new era in England. With the monarch no longer able to levy taxes and control the military, parliamentary interests now dictated the direction of English politics. As England continued to be involved in wars a clear sense of nationalism was on the rise. We also see in the data the rise of the two political parties, the Tories and the Whigs. It is understandable that as political parties begin to emerge that imperialism began. One way parties can win over voters is by promising to bolster a country’s military might. While long standing armies in England had long been frowned upon, as the monarch became more obsolete this belief faded.
The first text, written by J. Brewer, is a secondary source that contains charts and various graphs that that discuss the amount of personal in each section of the army, taxes, revenue, and debts from the various wars that England has fought over the years. These charts and graphs cover from the late 1600’s into the late 1700’s, covering almost 100 years of conflict. Based off the charts and data, one could easily see that England was spending a lot of money to finance their several wars. Not only this, but the English government was spending a lot of money on other things that caused taxes to come into play. The second text, written by D. Hayton, is another secondary source containing more charts and diagrams, but this text also gives us some background information as well to support the charts. The diagrams from this text are mainly focuses on election numbers, based on votes, as well as other important data from Parliament. This text only focuses on around a 15 year span, ranging from the late 1600’s to the early 1700’s. Hayton shows the amount of voters that took part in each election as well as the the success rate of the legislative, which increases over the years. Both of these texts are to show the reader the significant changes that happened to the English government over the years, and these were changes that needed to happen.
Both of these texts show growth through the English economy through their charts and diagrams. The first text talks about increases in total tax revenue over the years due to the many wars they had to finance, as well as the fraction of the national debt unfunded, which significantly decreases over the years. These illustrate the fact that the English economy had begun to flourish due to these wars and that Parliament had begun to get a grasp over the nation. The second text talks about how Parliament’s increased power due to the fact that monarchial power was severely shrinking over this time period. Parliament used their newfound powers to enact several legislations and other rules, establishing themselves as powerful as the monarch if not greater. Both of these texts shows what life in England was like after the Glorious Revolution as well as the growing powers that Parliament seemed to be gaining.
The source of the first text is documents published by Parliament in 1868, and it shows numerous tables and other graphs depicting England’s finances over the years due to the wars. It is no secret that wars are costly, but in just a span of about a hundred years England had entered seven wars. Each time England entered another war it only increased the country’s debts. As seen in the first table, after each war that the England entered for the next war, they only increased the personnel in army and navy, with the exception of the Austrian War. Debts have a negative effect on economies and cause the government are able to reinvest less in their own economies because they have to be concerned with paying back their debts. On the contrary, increasing the size of the military as aforementioned, increases the number of jobs in the country which is beneficial to the economy. In the second chart it can be seen that during the American Revolution, the national debt had hit an all-time peak. In order to fund these wars, the government kept increasing the net income tax, which the people were not happy about.
The second document is also filled with graph and other tables. Though, some of these graphs focus on the political effects that the economy was having on Parliament. For example, in the first graph highlights how the number of constituencies contested had remained relatively contestant until it hit a peak during 1710, which happened to be towards the end the Spanish War, when the government was spending a lot and debt was increasing. Also, a graph on page 387 of the second document there was in increase in private bills introduced to Parliament after the Revolution, which also represents a time when Whigs and Tories were having many disputes. A huge part of the Glorious Revolution was the idea of fiscal credibility, meaning that the debt run up by the Wars was the responsibility of Parliament, not just the king. All of the graphs shown in the first document as well are following the Glorious Revolution, so it shows the effects of all the policies put in place.
The first text, “Sinews of Power,” comes from the book The Sinews of Power: War, Money, and the English State, 1688-1783. This book was written by John Brewer and published by the Harvard University Press. Since this book was written about a historical time period it is a secondary scholarly source. The data that Brewer included in the section given illustrates the amount of debt England was in after each of the wars, the increase in military expenditure throughout the years, and the growth of net tax income. The second text, “The House of Commons 1690-1715,” is a book written by David Hayton. It was published in 2002. It is a secondary scholarly source because it was written about a historical time period. In the section given, Hayton provides data on the percentage of constituencies contested at general elections in England and Wales. He also provides data on the pass rate of legislation over the time period 1660-1715.
The first text, “Sinews of Power,” shows how much debt England is in after each war. This implies a struggling English economy. For example, after the Nine Years War, England was £16,700,00 in debt. After the American War, England was £242,900,000 in debt. This text also includes a graph that shows the increase in military expenditure that came along with the wars-a possible explanation to the massive increase in debt. The second text, “The House of Commons 1690-1715,” shows England’s growing political stability during this time period. This is shown by one graph in particular. This graph details the pass rate of legislation by parliament from 1660-1715. There is a relatively steady increase in the percentage of legislation passed beginning in the 1680s.
The first text, “The Sinews of Power,” was written by John Brewer in 1989. Due to the text being written in 1989, and because it is a reflection of data from a different time period, it can be considered a secondary source. In “The Sinews of Power,” Brewer analyzes the increase of military spending and the size of England’s bureaucracy to display the impact of the Glorious Revolution. The second text is “The House of Commons 1690-1715” by David Hayton. Also a secondary source, Hayton is also relating concrete data from the time period to how England changed after the Glorious Revolution. However, while Brewer primarily examined government spending and military expenses, Hayton looks at the history of elections in England. By looking at elections in England, Hayton is able to examine the increasing polarization between the Whigs and Tories, or as he frequently calls them, “Court and Country.” In all, these texts are both similar in their being secondary, scholarly sources, but both focus on different aspects of England to contextualize the Glorious Revolution.
Looking further at the data given by Brewer, we are given greater insight into the impact that the continent’s geopolitical conflicts had on England. First, we see that from 1689 to 1784 the size of England’s military, including navy and army, had almost doubled, and spending had actually quadrupled. This reflects England’s growing concern in the conflicts of Europe and her start as an empire, rather than an isolated kingdom. Additionally, the increase in taxation to support England’s wars reflects the nation’s growing bureaucracy and involvement in the lives of its people. However, in addition to taxation, England also accrued a large debt as a result of its heavy spending. This can be seen as a brand new development in financial thinking, as before debt was seen as negative by mercantilist standards. While the financial and military aspects are important, Hayton also argues that looking at political shifts can reveal new information on how England was evolving. First, looking at the percentage of contested elections, we see that due to many issues plaguing English society, increasing political polarization was present. Furthermore, in looking at the size of the ‘moneyed interest,’ we see the push and pull of the two major political factions, the Whigs and the Tories. One example of this is the gentle decline of the Whigs due to issues like the perceived corruption in London and the Sacheverell riots.
The first text, “The Sinews of Power,” was written in 1988 by J. Brewer and the data was published by the Harvard University Press. The text is a secondary source and portrays the data pertaining to the financial and militaristic standing of the British economy post-Glorious Revolution. Based on the data shown in the document, the British Empire spent lots of money on war, went into debt, and continued to send more troops into battle. Brewer focuses in on government spending regarding the military and the costs of warfare. The statistics show that during this time period, the amount of money England disbursed to fund a military and warfare increased drastically when looked at in comparison to earlier eras. The second source, “The House of Commons 1690-1715,” was written by D. Hayton and published in 2002 by the University of Cambridge Press. The text is a secondary source and depicts the spending of the British Parliament when it came to implementing policy and putting bills in place. Unlike Brewer, Hayton’s research narrows in on increased government spending in relation to the power hold and ideology that came as a result of the growth of Parliament after the Glorious Revolution. However, the statistics in both texts show a significant increase in the amount of spending within the English government that came as a result of the modernization of England and the establishment of the country as the most dominant world power going into the 18th century.
According to both pieces of data, a similar trend is shown where it is evident that there was a general increase in spending by the British Parliament during the 17th and 18th centuries. The growth in government spending showed that Parliament took a greater amount of power over controlling England’s funds more than ever before. The legislative body now had more monetary power than the monarch and looked to expand the British Empire’s financial interests. Parliament began to invest lots of funds into building up the military, sending troops into warfare, and the expenses that came along with fighting several wars during this time period. However, the power of the purse had some negative effects on the financial status of the country as well due to the fact that they went into debt as a result of costly wars with other nations. The country got themselves involved in many wars in order to expand the influence of the British Empire. During this British Era, the data in the sources portrays the significant increase of Parliamentary power, which led to a decrease in monarchical power due to the fact that the king barely had any monetary power at this point in time. In other words, the balance of power shifted because the government began to gain more power with its new financial authority and the monarch lost most monetary prerogative.
The first article is “The sinews of power” by J. Brewer, written in 1998. This article outlines the amount of taxes collected by parliament and what they spend that money on. Through the graphs one can see that as England goes through the years, parliament spends the largest amount of money on war and the military by a vast margin. This is because parliament has a vested interest in war, as they attempt to become one of the strongest military powers in the war, so it would make sense that England would enter In more wars and spend more money on war than ever before. This also shows that parliament has much more power than the monarch now. They are now completely controlling the military powers of England, and are dictating when and the budget for the military something that the king used to have control over. At the time London is one of the wealthiest cities in the world, and now parliament have complete control over the financial aspect of the city making them one of the most powerful entities in the world at the time. War also increases government spending so by entering in a large amount of wars, parliament is spending more money and also taking in more money, therefor increasing their power and influence in England. Parliament are becoming more and more powerful, as the king begins to lose power.
The second text is “The house of commons 1690-1715” by D. Hayton. This article is similar to the first one, but instead of focusing mainly on war, It focuses on the general legislation that parliament is passing. It also focuses on the percentage of people that are voting In the parliament elections during this time. During this time after the glorious revolution parliament now has the most power in England to create and pass laws and legislation. They are more powerful than the king and are now beginning to adjust to this fact, with the passing of more and more legislation. Both articles show that parliament is becoming the force in the English government, and is now adjusting to the fact. The second article also shows the percentages of the English voters that are voting in the parliament elections as this is a a fairly new thing that the power that the land owners in England have.
These two documents are both secondary sources that analyze the economic and political landscape in the late 1600s to the late 1700s. The first document is a selection of pages from John Brewer’s “The Sinews of Power: War, Money, and the English State, 1688-1783.” As can be seen by the title of the book, these documents focus on the effects of the various wars that England was involved in during this time period. Brewer shows how devastating war expenditure is on the taxpayer and the royal treasury. The second document is a group of pages from the “Introductory Survey,” by David W. Hayton. Hayton focuses on a smaller time period than Brewer, looking at the political happenings in Parliament at the time. Hayton shows information about the amount of legislation that went through the Parliament, as well as discussing the composition of the House of Commons and Lords as the party line between Whigs and Tories became more pronounced. These texts both show the changes in the political world of England and represent a modernization of England, even as their debt grew to massive sizes.
These two documents show above all else how the Glorious Revolution strengthened the English Parliament. With the checks and balances that the Bill of Rights put on the monarchy, the Parliament had to take on more responsibility. With this came the increase of political parties, and an increase in contested elections. This is an early glance at modern politics and the documents show how it caused issues in England. With Parliament split into two parties these two parties had to vie for power in their own ways. One method became military spending, different parties used the military to strengthen their image in the public. This led to an onslaught of conflicts that the English involved themselves in, causing massive debts. Without the power of the monarch to aggressively tax the population, the government began to spend far more than they were bringing in, and the debt became massive in a few decades. Towards the end of the 1700s, the majority of taxpayer money started going into working the debt down, causing a stagnation in the English economy after their conflicts with America. This would eventually lead to the collapse of the great English Empire that eventually became too insatiable to fund.
The first text, “The Sinews of Power,” written by J. Brewer in 1988 is a secondary scholarly historical account of the post-Glorious Revolution England. It is secondary because Brewer himself did not live or participate in the events that he describes. Brewer is writing this account in 1988, suggesting that there has already been multiple histories written on England at this time, which could explain why Brewer includes so many charts and sets of data in this historical account. This text focuses on the years from the 1690s to the 1790s. These charts focus on the finances of England, with some showing the growth of national defense spending, others showing the growth of the number of employees working for the government what he calls the “fiscal bureaucracy,” and others graphs and charts displaying the developments of taxes, debt, and the relationship between the two. Overall, these data sets seek to show the growing amount of spending exercised by England. The second text, “The House of Commons 1690-1715,” written by D. Hayton, is once again a secondary scholarly historical account, this time published by the Cambridge University Press in 2002. This text focuses on the time span between 1690 and 1715, presenting data on the constituencies in England and Wales as well as Parliament, specifically the changing size of the “moneyed interest” in Parliament and the amounts of legislative initiatives and passed acts throughout the years. This data attempts to illustrate the political, more so than financial, evolution of England.
The Brewer text displays the growing amount of finances that England had to commit to the wars that they were involved in. Not only does the average annual expenditure take off after the Nine Years War, ending in 1697, but the average annual tax revenue and debt both increased after this time. The tables showing the increasing amounts of employees in government departments also illustrates the government becoming a larger and larger supplier of employment to their citizens. Overall, the many tables in this text show the government becoming larger in terms of its bureaucracies. The constant influx of wars and the resulting increase in the fiscal bureaucracies and the national debt evidently force the government to grow and become more reliant on its spending power. The second text and its data reflect changes in English politics. The first chart shows that the constinuines contested in England and Wales stay relatively constant, revolving around the 35% mark, despite a sudden peak of 48.7% in 1710 and Hayton seems to attribute this partially to the Sacheverell Impeachment going on in 1710. The decreasing size of the “moneyed interest” in Parliament suggests that the representative system was in fact becoming more fair and representative of the people. In 1690, the “moneyed interest” took up 12.2% of Parliament, but in 1713 this decreased to 11.2%. Additionally, the rising success rate of acts being passed in Parliament rises sizably. From 1660-1690, the success rate is only at 31.1%, but by 17-15, this rate is at 60.2%. This shows more agreement and unity overall in Parliament, which can be a product of Parliament existing and being in power long enough to know how to be self-sufficient.
The first text, “The Sinews of Power,” was data compiled by J. Brewer, through Harvard University in 1988. It can be assumed that data compiled through a research institution such as Harvard University can be reliable and unbiased. Both texts are scholarly secondary sources. The second text, “ The House of Commons 1690-1715,” is data compiled by D. Hayton of Cambridge University. This data was compiled in 2002. While both sources explore data from the late 1600s through the early 1700s in England, their focus is rather different. “The Sinews of Power” by J. Brewer focuses on financial data. This includes graphs regarding expenditures, income, taxes and debt. On the other hand, “The House of Commons 1690-1715” by D. Hayton explores the logistics of the House of Commons, involving contested elections, number of days in session and success rate of proposed legislation. The purpose of the first text was to show the increase in spending, taxes and debt due to Great Britain’s repeated wars. The second text shows trends in the House of Commons.
It can be presumed from the first text, “The Sinews of Power,” that the English economy was growing rapidly. This can be seen in the dramatic increase in military spending between the War of Austrian Succession and the 7 Years War. While English government was still falling into considerable debt, they spent more because they were able to bring in more revenue from taxes, due to economic growth, and unlike previous wars. “The House of Commons 1690-1715” shows that the House of Commons percentage of success rate in terms of legislative initiatives were on an upward trend from 1690-1715. This demonstrates a phenomena of the Glorious Revolution, with less conflict over religion or between parliament and monarch, the success rate of legislation was able to grow, therefore passing more taxes which are seen in the first text. Taxation spikes dramatically along with national debt. While income for military spending increased from taxes it was clearly not enough for Great Britain to fight so many costly wars. However, military spending as a percentage of government expenditure was on a decline. This shows that the government began spending more in other sections of society, as well as needing to fund a growing bureaucracy. Overall, England began spending more as a result of the Glorious Revolution as a more organized and cooperating government ensued this revolution which allowed for increase taxes, and a bureaucracy to manage the spending and debt.
The first text is various charts and data about monetary issues in 17th and 18th century England. The data was likely compiled by a historian. It shows that the role of the army and frequency of wars has expanded, both in personale and in debt. Tax revenues rise dramatically with excise taxes being the most popular. This new spending has forced England to hire more people for tax compliance. The second text also gives data in the form of charts about 17th and 18th century England. It was also likely compiled by a historian. It explains that the number of seats contested grew larger in the election of 1710 as the debate over the role of religion continued. It also shows that Parliament gradually became more successful in passing laws.
In short, England’s economy is transitioning from one focused on domestic production to one engaged with the world. England is expanding its role in the world through the increase in military spending and the colonial possessions that come with it. England is also becoming a modern economy in that they are taking on much more debt. Debt management becomes an important issue that simply did not exist prior to this time period. The debate over religion in England continues. The Sacheverell impeachment leads to a surge of seats being contested in Parliament. Even as England transitions to a world power, debates over religion are still common. In Parliament, they gradually became more successful at passing laws. This allowed England to act as an efficient actor on the world stage, as domestic disagreements were becoming less common.
The first document is written by John Brewers about the financial process in which England became a leading world power. The excerpt is a secondary source from a book called “The Sinews of Power” released in 1990. The excerpt explains the cost of going to war. As England becomes more and more involved in more wars, more debt is incurred to cover the cost. The data that he displays shows that there is a great financial cost to going to war, but to become a world power you need to invest into wars that will reward you. The second document was an excerpt from the house of commons, which details the election in Wales and England. It shows the large amount of spending that parliament was doing on wars at the time. Each document details financial insight into the beginning of England as the dominant world power.
Both documents show the blooming english economy in the wake of the Glorious Revolution. With parliament establishing dominance over the control of the economy and the king no longer able to levy taxes or control the military, parliament now dictated the direction of english politics. As power shifted we see an increase in government spending coupled with an increase in gov’t debt. This shift led parliament to dictate the direction of spending and interest, which lead back to being involved in more wars. An increase in military expenditure leads to an increase in nationaistic feelings. This increase in military expenditure also lead to shift in public opinion against a long standing army which was originally frowned upon under the monarchy.
“Sinews of Power” is a document that uses charts to show the expenditures of the British government over the the 17th and 18th century. After each diagram, there is an accompanying explanation explaining the diagram. This document was made possible by research from John Brewer compiled in 1988. It is a secondary source document written after the fact. It can be reasonably inferred that the purpose of this document(based on the diagrams) is to show how English government expenditures increased over various wars and government revenue increased as well because of an increase in taxes. The second document “House of Commons 1690-1715” was written by D. Hayton and shows how English government became contested over time. Like the previous document, there are diagrams that shows trends through the use of diagrams. However, Hayton’s data is focused on trends in the house of commons between 1690-1715, which is a much narrower period that Brewer’s research.
The first document written by Brewer demonstrates several key things about how England is changing in this period. Most importantly, it demonstrates England’s advent as an interventionist power. In a time period of roughly 100 years, England intervenes in over 5 major conflicts that do not threaten the island of England. England’s participation in these conflicts is purely a power play. Brewer’s research also demonstrates how England’s expenditures increase during this period and taxes/debt increase to meet them. England is ‘investing’ in these conflicts for potential future economic gains and attempting to become an even larger colonial power. The second document written by D. Hayton shows the trends in parliament during a short time window. However, his research also shows trends that hint of a transition in English parliament. This is most evident to me in the graph that shows the decrease in moneyed interest in parliament. With fewer MPs looking out for the wealthy, parliament is more representative of the population and can better represent the wishes of the English people. The increase in legislative success also shows how a parliament elected with the interest of the people at heart is more likely to pass legislation than one that is divided between the moneyed MPs and ones who represent the commoners. These two documents show the Glorious Revolutions success because the English Parliament is supreme in making decisions, starting wars, and conducting policy. At this point, the Monarchy has few ways to contradict the decisions of Parliament.
The first text that was analyzed, “The Sinews of Power”, is a source written by John Brewer that compiles a variety of data related to British affairs after the Glorious Revolution. This source would be considered a secondary scholarly source since Brewer himself did not live through these events. Additionally, it appears as if Brewer obtained a multitude of this data from other sources and published them as one source. The data that Brewer compiles presents data from a very large time period, typically from 1690 to 1790. Some of the data included in this source include the personnel and money expended for various wars, average military expenditures in comparison to total government expenditures, and the tax rates across the various wars. The second text that was analyzed, “The House of Commons 1690-1715”, is a source written by D. Hayton that compiles a variety of data related to British economic and political affairs. This source would also be considered a secondary scholarly source since Hayton himself did not live through these events. Similar to Brewer, Hayton compiled a multitude of data from other sources and published them as one source. The data that Hayton compiles presents a smaller period of English history, with data sets ranging from 1690 to 1715. Some of the data included in this source include the constituencies contested at general elections, rate of legislative initiatives, and the level of consistency in voting.
When analyzing both sources, it appears that both authors are showing the impact of socioeconomic and geopolitical affairs on the English realm. Across both sources, it seems as if the general trend is that Parliament increased its spending as its power over England strengthened across the 17th and 18th centuries. As seen in “The Sinews of Power”, the number of navy and army personnel employed for the war efforts was generally increasing, as was the average annual expenditure during the wartime. Furthermore, military debt was consistently on the rise across all of the war efforts. The government was allowed to increase government expenditures due to increasing various types of taxes across the wars. The constant increase in government expenditures between the 17th and 18th century shows the power that Parliament was assuming. The monarch no longer had more authority over the legislative body in dictating the financial affairs of the English realm. Although Parliament was looking to increase England’s financial standing and power through investing more in military affairs, this did throw the English into a large amount of debt. This shows a shift in financial philosophies, as debt was a commonly frowned upon phenomenon. In the future, debt would become commonplace in every society, as made evident by the trillions of dollars of debt that the United States is in, yet remains a world power. As seen in “The House of Commons 1690-1715”, Hayton seems to focus on the change in political turmoil across 1690 to 1715. As shown in the constituencies contested at general elections, there is a general steady trend in the amount of contested elections. In prior time periods, there would likely be a higher number or steady increase in the amount of contested elections. Furthermore, there is a steady increase in the amount of successful legislative initiatives that were passed. Overall, I believe that this source shows that the political turmoil in England was decreasing. I believe that this can be accredited to a decrease in the power of the monarch and an increase in the power of Parliament, as Parliament and its interests are more closely related to the people.
The first text was written by John Brewer, a historian, in 1988. It is a compilation of data regarding the finances of the English government and economy in the 18th century. The second text is also written by a historian and is also a compilation of data from 17th and 18th century England but focuses on government actions and legislation rather than finances. Both texts are written to give a different perspective on the events in England during this time period. The first text shows that Britain increased both its spending and its taxes throughout the 18th century, and each sharp increase is associated with a war. In addition, the number of soldiers and other army personnel also increased. The data in the second text shows a general trend of increased success rate in legislative initiatives from 1660-1715. The sharp increase occurred over the period of the War of Spanish Succession, and it is likely that the war led to a more unified government, because Britain needed to fight against outside forces.
While there was a higher success rate for legislation, the amount of initiatives per day actually decreased over the same period. Contested elections were also common, especially because of the religious tensions between the Whig and Tory parties. Both texts indicate that as Britain grew into a world power, it spent (and borrowed) more money to fight in wars, and the political system developed into a two-party system with high participation and involvement. Money was also spent on increasing the number of government personnel. Overall, Parliament became more powerful and the government grew in size and involvement, and at the same time Britain itself grew into a role as a world power.
The first document is a secondary scholar source written by J. Brewer and published by Harvard University in 1988. It contains a series of graphs and statistics on England from the 17th to 18th centuries. The graphs mostly pertain to the financial status of England during this time period and primarily focuses on the sovereign debt of England. It focuses on the financial whole of England and the time and mostly shows how much warfare affected the financial status of England. The second document is titled, “The House of Commons 1690-1715” and is also a secondary source document. It is another analytical piece that uses many statistics, records, and graphs to represent England in the specified time period. Instead of focusing on the finances of England like in the first document, this second document focuses on the political workings of England at the time. It has graphs and records of how many acts were passed in parliament at certain times and other figures showing the activity levels and effectiveness of parliament at the time.
From the first document we can access the debt levels of England from 1692 to the end of the 18th century. It is clear from the data that wartime was very expensive for England. Each of the wars that England took part in during this time period gave rise to its debt levels as much financing is needed for a war. It is interesting to note that it is civil government expenditures that takes the sharpest rise during times of war. The spikes in taxation match with wartime as taxation was needed to finance the armies and navies. While there was many wars to spend money on, the percentage of military spending of the total budget is relatively low, below 14%, and does not increase overtime. It is also clear that the national spending of England is increasing as a whole. This comes due to colonial trade and how profitable it was as England’s national income has increased greatly by the end of the 18th century. The second document reveals the increasing role of parliament in England with the end of the Stuarts to the ascension of William and Mary. Parliament’s increased role gave them more control over the expenditure of the government. There was a large number of bills and acts attempting to be passed during the time which shows how active parliament was at the time.
The two documents are sets of data involving Parliament and the Government in England during the Glorious Revolution. These texts are secondary sources. The first text was written by Brewer in 1988. This text outlines the financial status of the government during the time of William III and Mary II. The second text was written by Hayton and was published in 2002. Hayton focuses more on legislature and voting in England during this time. These documents were created to show how the government was after this time. The documents showed that England’s Government was getting bigger and more powerful while trading also began more important. Haytons Document showed how many people voted for the election and helped show how many people were involved in the Government. The documents outline the Government during the period of 1688-1714 showing the financial and legislative changes and variations.
These texts display the growth in the English Economy and government after the time of the Glorious Revolution. As stated in the first text, the government’s data show an increase in income and trade during this time. To expand the government, they increased the spending of the Government. This leads to debt but also helps the economy and grows the country. Also, during this time England was involved in many wars. This leads to a lot of spending on military and war. The second text shows the voting results between the whigs and tories during this time. It shows how the majority of Parliament was whig but both parties were growing. The glorious revolution allowed for this change in economy and politics. The growth of the economy and betterment of the government gives the Glorious revolution its name.
The texts are records of the members and happenings of the English government over several centuries encompassing the joint reign of William and Mary and Anne II. These both of these documents are official records of government offices, spending, debt, war expenditure, elections, revenue, and more. They consist of mainly of graphs, some of which supported with analysis. These texts show the expansion of England’s power over the years through increasing funds, military, and debt as they launch themselves into war after war increasing their international presence.
The English economy is growing and English politics is becoming increasingly competitive. In the first text the very first graph shows the drastic difference in average annual tax revenue going from 3,640,00 during the Nine Years War (1689-1697) to 12,154,200 during the American War (1775-1784). And as a result of these numerous wars that the monarchs throw the country into another graph in the first text displays a relatively steady increase in debt from two million pounds in 1690 to roughly nine million in 1785. Even more so, in a graph displays the total net tax income from 1690 to 1791, the graph is clearly increasing even in periods of time the country was not engaged in war. This reveals just how well the English economy did in peacetime. As for English politics the government was becoming increasingly efficient as shown in the increasing amount of staff in a graph in text one, to the point they added caps on the number of workers in certain departments. Furthermore, the second text also displays an increase in efficiency through their graph denoting the overall increasing of Parliamentary working days and as a result an increased number of legislative initiatives and acts passed with an increasing success rate. These trends specifically reflect events after the Glorious Revolution such as the increase in Parliamentary power and competitiveness as well as the modernization of the English economy to include credit/debt financing resulting in the creation of a national bank.
The first text “The sinews of power” was written by J. Brewer in 1988 and is a secondary scholarly text. Mr. Brewer had written during his time at Harvard University about data he had collected between the years 1690-1790 on England financial life. In his paper, he has several charts and graphs showing the change in taxes, income, government spending, and debt of the British government and its people. He tries to show a relationship between the several wars that England had participated in over the hundred years he studied and the change in the financial status of England. The second text “The house of commons 1690-1715” was written by D. Hayton in 2002 and is a secondary scholarly text. Mr. Hayton wrote this paper during his time at Cambridge University by collecting data on British politics between the years 1660-1715. Mr. Hayton creates several different tables and graphs with little excerpts on the bottom on the topics of parliaments success rates, number of parliamentary initiatives, and contested general elections. Hayton attempts to show us a relationship between what was happening in politics between the years 1660-1715 and changes of which party (whig, tory) had more control in parliament.
Through Brewer’s studied you can clearly see proof of the statement that wars cost money. You can clearly see a relationship between the governmental debt and wars. You can also see that each war is costing the government more and more. This speaks to the fact that during the 1700’s, advancements in war had grown tremendously over the century. This meant more men, more weapons, more boats. Brewer also shows how the government tries to make up for the loss of cash with raises in several different taxes. You can see that during times of war and right before going to war taxes in several categories had spiked to get cash to get their armies and weapons. However when you look at the graph talking about government revenues you can clearly see it was extremely volatile and though they raised taxes it did not take away from the national debt. Hayton data tells us a story between the difference in reigns underneath William II and Mary II and their daughter Anne. Underneath Mary, you see the amount parliament had met was marginally more than under Anne. You see the difference in the success rate, as underneath Anne the success rate was much larger even though parliament met less and proposed less. This shows a growth in change of British people and a popular consensus of parliament. This was during the time of the brith of political parties in England, so possibly what could be happening is we see under Anne a takeover of a political party where they have so much of the majority where the other party could not propose what they wanted.
These texts were written by historical scholars and published for other scholars. They specifically analyze government spending and government representation/production respectively. These texts were written some time after the time period, likely recently. These texts are showing how English government changed as result of multiple revolutions and wars and how its change positioned it to be a world power. These changes in policy shown in the graphs are generally responsive to events of time, as also indicated. Brewer, the author of the first text, focuses specifically on the financial state of England, while Hayton focuses on Parliamentary elections and production.
The Brewer document provides financial data relative to war times and military statistics. The first table shows interesting figures regarding military expenses. Over the time period, England’s professional military grew 2x, while its military spending grew 4x. This means England is spending more per person in the military to make it better equipped and ready to fight to extend the empire. The table also shows astronomical debt, tax revenue, and military expense growth. This is showing that to spend 4x on its military relative to what it was spending, it needs to collect more money and issue more debt. The following tables and charts break down how England did this, for instance a large growth in Excise taxes and war-time military spending being roughly 70% of government expenditures. England also saw most of these financing figures grow during war time, reflecting most of its extra spending going toward military (Rule 3 of world domination: Wars are Expensive). The Hayton document focuses on Parliament. Specifically, over the time period, parliamentary contested elections remained relatively constant at 40%. Despite this, parliament saw the amount of bills proposed decrease, but the pass rate of bills increase. This indicates Parliamentary representatives are more focused on passing the bills they propose to show their electorates their efficiency, so they are proposing fewer but better bills.
The authors of both of these texts are likely British economists. While the initial data was recorded by the economists at the time, the data was gathered and published at a more contemporary date by current financial experts. These are likely educated individuals, and those who were recording the finances at the time were probably trusted, seemingly very smart people. These texts are historical information meant for record keeping and data collection over time. They show the spending patterns and economic climate of approximately 1690 to 1790. They largely argue the increased spending and taxes during war times. The authors of these texts would write these and publish them mainly for information’s sake, but also likely to explain current economic climates or patterns, or to learn from past ones. They also could explain other aspects of British life at the time, like cultural and religious life, as they were all affected by the economy.
All in all, the data shows a major growth of British economy. It also shows the increasing power Parliament had in economic decisions and the increasing effects on British citizens. As spoken about in class, looking at people from a productivity or statistical standpoint in the face of expenditures is evident here, as Table 2.1 shows the personnel hired in the Navy and Army during wartimes. Those hired in each grew chronologically. Along with those hired, the average annual expenditure, tax revenue, and debt increased over time. The expenditures are not constantly on the rise, as Figure 2.1 points out, they spike during war time, but decrease following the end, usually. However, the interim times of war have higher expenditures later in the century, although lower than war time. With the growing economy, comes growing government as a whole, evident in Table 3.2. Bureaucracies grew in influence and size. Evidently, the data shows readers that everything was booming over this century, even the debt, and government involvement.
The first text is a secondary source produced by J.Brewer our of Harvard University in 1988. At the time of publishing, Brewer was one of the leading historians with regards to 17th and 18th century England, with a specialized knowledge regarding the immediate effects of the Glorious Revolution. Brewer includes graphs within “Sinews of Power” that depict the large amount of debt England faced financially after each war, the growth of tax income due to this, and of course the exponentially growing military expenditures. Brewer notes that the money spent by the English government and the subsequent policies due to their lack of capital were greatly influenced through the effects of the Glorious Revolution. The second text, “The House of Commons 1690-1715” was authored by David Hayton and published through the University of Cambridge free press in 2002. This source is also a secondary source and it includes details with regards to Parliament’s spending during the aforementioned time period, post Glorious Revolution. As Hayton focuses largely on parliament’s spending during this time, hereflects that likely due to the shift in attitude with regards to who controlled the power within the government, parliament drastically increased the rate at which they passed policies and discussed bills. Hayton includes statistics tailored towards the new, large number of English voters found within parliament due to the new government policies. Major changes were happening throughout England post Glorious Revolution, largely resulting in greater spending as displayed through the statistics and articles provided by both Brewer and Hayes. As Brewer decided to focus mainly on displaying and discussing the financial changes facing England and its citizens at the time within his publication, Hayes used statistics from the level of consistency in voters to the rate of legislative initiatives to display the massive revamping of English government and the way it operates at the time.
Brewer states very frankly and it is supported through his statistics that national spending for England has increased dramatically after the Glorious Revolution. Subsequently the noted increase in national debt leads to an increase in taxes towards the citizens which Brewer also displayed in his work. It is important to note that the majority of spending by the English government during this time was spent to further strengthen and expand its military, a tactic that earlier English government would likely have frowned upon. Hayton displays through his work that this was also a significant time in the evolution of the English political system. Through his study of the “moneyed interest” and the amount of contested elections at the time, Hayton is able to conclude that the overall system of English government is becoming more fair towards its citizens and is definitely more fair than it ever had been in the past. The newfound self sufficiency of parliament is also on display as Hayton includes a statistic declaring the success rate in parliament to have grown from approx. 30%-60%. This demonstrates a greater union within parliament and English society in general that was a direct result of the Glorious Revolution and the subsequent changes it brought on. Now more than ever as well, England has decided to engage in global matters, determined to become an expanding empire rather than a domestic power.