The Cost of English Wheat

While the prices of agricultural products were falling throughout Europe, those in England remained relatively constant, largely because dramatic local price disparities diminished. Wilhelm Abel has calculated a relative index of the price of agricultural products from 1650 to 1700. On a base of 100, prices fell to 84 for England, 75 for France, 73 for the southern Netherlands, 70 for the United Provinces, and 60 for Poland during this period.^[25] Although the English maintained a high level of exports during this period, it was not a result of the low cost of their agricultural products.^[26] Even London prices, which were generally lower than prices in the rest of England for the period 1700–1759, were higher than Danzig prices, except for during the 1740s. How, then, can the competitive position of English wheat be explained? Part of the answer lies in geography. England benefited from being closer to the principal European markets than Danzig, and, in addition, English ports were open during the winter, while the port of Danzig was not. The export bounties, which often covered freight and handling charges, made English grain competitive throughout Europe. Another part of the answer lies in the existence of storage facilities and stocks, which assured relative price stability in England. Despite high average prices for English domestic grain, price stability allowed English merchants to take advantage of the price fluctuations on the Continent.

Because of the government's pro-export policies, the larger English estates had an advantage that they would not have otherwise enjoyed in relation to small peasant farms in France during this period of grain surplus and low continental prices. Farmers of large English estates maintained a larger percentage of the arable land in cultivation than would otherwise have been needed. The grain trade certainly contributed to the well-being of producers and to agrarian prosperity. Nevertheless, the net cost to general economic growth in Britain of subsidizing agriculture is difficult to assess.^[27]

[25] Wilhelm Abel, Agrarkrisen und Agrarkonjunktur im Mitteleuropa vom 13. bis zum 19. Jahrhundert (Berlin: P. Parey, 1966), 152–53.

[26] It seems from the figures given by Braudel and Spooner that England's system of large estates was performing less competitively than France's system of small peasant production. See Fernand P. Braudel and F. Spooner, "Prices in Europe from 1450," in The Cambridge Economic History of Europe, ed. E. E. Rich and C. H. Wilson, 4:470–71.

[27] See the discussion among N. F. R. Crafts, Jeffrey G. Williamson, and Joel Mokyr in Explorations in Economic History 24 (1987): 245–325; E. L. Jones, "Agriculture 1700–80," in The Economic History of Britain since 1700, vol. 1, 1700–1860, ed. Roderick Floud and Donald McCloskey (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981), 36–66; and Ormrod, English Grain Exports, 70–95.