E.P. Thompson. “The Moral Economy of the English Crowd in the Eighteenth Century.” Past and Present, Vol. 50, Feb. 1971. Pp. 76-136.
E.P. Thompson, a Marxist historian, in his article “The Moral Economy of the English Crowd
in the Eighteenth Century” published in 1971, seeks to explain the actions of peasants when
faced with a changing economic and political landscape. That is from a system of feudalism or
mercantilism to a free market, capitalistic society based on the theories in Adam Smith’s book
The Wealth of Nations. Thompson does this by exploring the various ways the peasants reacted
to the rising prices of bread and corn and what actions they took to try to ensure a system of,
what Thompson called, “paternalism” perpetuated and sustained them in times of hardship.
Thompson starts out by arguing that the food riot was a form of popular social protest by the
lower classes of people.[1] People reacted with protests not when they were starving and
emaciated, but when they were faced with the prospect of their share of the crop was going to be
exported or they felt prices were too high. He argues that these riots were a disciplined with
“clear objectives” and as time went on they became more focused and more disciplined in
nature.[2] The peasants involved in the riots saw them as a way to legitimize a perceived wrong
committed against them. They believed that they were defending the old way of life and that the
community as a whole was behind. Thus, they were protecting the “moral economy.”[3]
As Eighteenth Century England began to modernize into a capitalist and free market society
many felt that breads and corns must be sold with little intermediary help to the consumer.[4]
Thompson argues that this is where the confrontation between the old ways of paternalism and
the new free market clash.[5] The paternalistic model, Thompson argues, was rooted in Statute
Law, common law, and customs.[6] The government held onto this way of thinking until the
1770s and when food shortage emergencies arose.[7] The paternalist model was intended to
protect the poorer classes from price gouging by middlemen. They felt that the grains should be
sold from the farmer to the consumer as directly as possible and without the help of an
intermediary.[8] Thus, this lead to the restriction of the middleman in the sale of grains.[9]
Next, Thompson turns his attention to the protection of the consumer. In theory, consumers
were supposed to buy there grains from the market and then take them to the miller or baker.[10]
The miller and baker were seen as servants to the community at large and thus were not
supposed to charge outrageous prices for their services.[11] In theory this seems like the ideal
paternalistic world, but in reality this was not the case. Farmers often boycotted the market in
favor of selling to the bakers, millers, and other middlemen.[12] This was because they could get a
better price for their crop than they could when selling directly to the consumer at a market.
Thompson provides a superb example of this when he relates how what may seem as natural and
“inevitable” to a modern day reader was not the case in the Eighteenth Century.[13] He goes on to
provide an example of a pamphlet that was circulated in 1768 of the horror that farmers would
do as they pleased with the crops they grew.[14]
Next, Thompson turns his attention to Adam Smith and his book The Wealth of Nations.
Thompson sees the changing English economy as going from Tudor policies to new free market
Policies, that is Smith wanted corn to trade freely and eventually the prices with the help of the
market would lower and risewith supply and demand.[15] Unlike the paternalistic model, Smith’s
model would allow for the middle man to have a significant place in the selling and trading of
grains.[16] Thompson concludes that this model holds no empirical evidence that is was able to
work in Eighteenth Century England.[17] He also states that this model would have been
“inherently unlikely” and that the evidence of the times points to a need for control of the market
by outside forces.[18]
Thompson then goes on to explain how the “crowd” protected their interest in making sure
the prices of grain stayed low. He provides examples, to back up his findings, of how the riots
were often led by women in the community and that the peasants felt it was their duty to “set the
prices” of grains at a reasonable level.[19]
E. P. Thompson provides an excellent, in-depth article on the changing market factors that
produced a backlash of riots against a free market society in Eighteenth Century England. He
covers all the turmoil the peasantry faced with the change to a free market, capitalist economy.
Thompson provides excellent examples to back up his findings and explains the reasoning
behind them in vivid detail. If this is not considered the seminal work on food riots it should be.
[1] E.P. Thompson, “The Moral Economy of the English Crowd in the Eighteenth Century,” Past and Present 50 (Feb. 1971): 78.
[2] Ibid. 78.
[3] Ibid., 78.
[4] Ibid., 80.
[5] Ibid., 80.
[6] Ibid., 83.
[7] Ibid., 83.
[8] Ibid., 83.
[9] Ibid., 83.
[10] Ibid., 83-84.
[11] Ibid., 83-84.
[12] Ibid., 85.
[13] Ibid., 86.
[14] Ibid., 86.
[15] Ibid., 89-90.
[16] Ibid., 90.
[17] Ibid., 91.
[18] Ibid., 94.
[19] Ibid., 110-115.