First Impressions and the Approach to Find Information
The first impressions regarding the document are associated with the analysis of its title. It is expected that the document written by Arthur Young will provide the information, some details, and accounts about traveling during the years of 1787, 1788, and 1789. Also, the title indicates that the documented travels were in the Kingdom of France. Having read the extract from the document, it is possible to focus on the information about differences in the life of French and English peasants.
It is possible to state that the life of the English peasants was better than the life of the French peasants because the Englishmen worked at large farms, and they were well-nourished in comparison with miserable French peasants. These impressions are the result of the focus on such colored words mentioned in the document as ‘enormous superiority’ or ‘constant state of improvement’ (Young 1794, 357). Readers can focus on the vivid picture of the peasants’ life in France and England during the 18th century.
Developing a contextual background related to the document’s content, it is important to find additional information on the source. Some research regarding the personality of the author and historical realities of France and England during the 18th century was necessary to discuss the document. Also, it was essential to develop a clear understanding of the author’s motives and objectives for writing travel journals.
The first important step to develop an effective framework for the analysis of the document was the research on the author’s personality. This step meant a collection of the information that could be found about the author of the document, his background, education, and career to explain the purpose of the document and the author’s position. Articles on Arthur Young’s personality works, and accomplishments were examined along with the contemporary prefaces to the author’s books.
The second step involved finding the complete variant of Young’s work on travels in France during 1787, 1788, and 1789 to understand the context of the author’s considerations. It was important to determine and follow the document’s storyline. After determining the document’s storyline, it also became essential to determine the reason for writing the document. This process involved the understanding of the document’s form and purpose. These steps were based on the work with the source.
The next step involved the focus on the critique related to Young’s work. Young’s notes were examined to determine the document’s intended audience. The purpose of the document and its relevance was discussed with references to finding and analyzing the articles which provided the critique of Young’s work. Many articles were found on the topic because of the active discussion of Young’s accomplishments in the academic field. Thus, the next step in the approach adopted towards the analysis of the document was the focus on the document’s authenticity. Analytical historical articles were helpful to cope with the task.
The final step was the focus on the document’s significance. It was found with references to critical articles that Yong’s work included important information on the social and political life in France and England, on the economy, religion, and culture of the French and English people during the period discussed in the document. The selected approach to analyzing the document was effective because the analysis of various critical aspects was conducted.
The Research Findings
The research revealed important information about Arthur Young’s personality and accomplishments as well as about the context within which the document was written. Arthur Young is discussed by contemporaries and researchers as the most popular European agriculturist of the 18th century. According to Allen, Young was interested in farming and in conducting different types of agricultural experiments to stimulate agricultural growth (Allen 1986, 937).
The desire to examine the field of agriculture in detail made Young travel over England and Ireland and then over France to study the patterns in agriculture and economics (Bartles 2001; Bloch 1966). Although the researchers admit the role of Young’s observations, they are rather critical while discussing the accuracy of the author’s conclusions.
On the one hand, Young was an influential writer on agriculture, and there was no other writer who had published the travel literature including the important agricultural information, observation notes, discussions of economic and social conditions in France, and statistical data (Brunt 2003). On the other hand, Young’s conclusions were rather misleading because of the author’s unique interpretation of the data (Allen and Ó Gráda 1988, 97).
It is noted by many researchers that Yong made unexpected conclusions from the presented and examined data (Bentham-Edwards 1967). However, Young is credited to be the populariser of new agriculture practices during the 18th century (Doll and Munns 2006; Gazley 1973). Yong recorded what he could observe during his traveling, and any facts regarding the agricultural practices and economic details such as land tenures, rents, sizes of properties, crops, prices, wages, cattle, and farm buildings were important to be discussed and analyzed in the context of the starting French Revolution.
It is found that the document was written in France, during the journey, and it is based on Young’s journal notes. The first journey in France was in 1787, and the following travels were associated with the period of the French Revolution in the country. That is why Young could observe the miserable state of the French peasants which led them to oppose the monarchy (Fussell 1943; Goldsmith 1984).
Referring to the researchers’ discussion of the historical context, it is possible to note that the document was written with the major aim of promoting better agriculture practices with references to the comparison of English and French situations and conditions (Gay 1927; Loehr 1969). Hence, the intended audience of the document can be discussed as the countries’ authorities, economists, and agriculturists (Hoffman 1986). Still, the work could be interesting for the other category of the population because of Young’s writing style which was simple and appealing.
The document’s style can be discussed as effective to convey the author’s intended message, especially about the discussion of the French agricultural practices (Jones 2012). The background of the work was the starting French Revolution, and the document can be discussed as a valuable representation of the social and economic situation based on various accounts, interviews, and reviews.
Larger Issues
The larger issues raised by the document are the nature of relationships between France and England, the role of politics in influencing economics, and the role of agriculture in reflecting the aspects of the economic and political life in the state. The document is important because it represents how French people and Englishmen described each other and how different their visions of politics and economics were.
Young explored the state of the French infrastructure referring to roads, he focused on the aspects of politics, and he examined different cultural practices demonstrated by the French nobles and peasants. In his works, Young also tries to record many other important details related to the social, economic, and everyday life as “natural scenery, the character of inns, parks, and mansions among others” (Woodward 1969, 58). It is important to note that Young’s discussion of lords’ properties was only one detail to discuss the whole wide system of the French economic life and state.
Young’s work is related to the start of the French Revolution and it demonstrates how politics, economics, and agriculture are interconnected and represent problems in this or that sphere. Exploring the agricultural issues, Young made conclusions about the miserable state of the French peasants in the context of the developing French Revolution. That is why the author’s work was frequently cited in the papers discussing the causes and aspects of the French Revolution (Shaw-Taylor 2001; Taylor 1989). The French Revolution was an influential event for Western Civilisation because it changed social and political patterns and courses.
Thus, the long-term effects of the Revolution in France were the profound changes in politics, society, and even religious ideas (Mingay 1975). Also, the other European countries were deeply affected by the consequences of the Revolution which led to the end of traditional practices in politics and economics. In this context, Young’s work served to predict possible changes in the economic and social life with references to their origins.
Young’s comments on various aspects of the French society were very significant for researchers not only in France but also in England due to the parallels they created. For instance, Young stated while comparing the social life and governments, “Take the mass of mankind, and you have more good sense in half an hour in England than in half a year in France —Government! Again:—all—all—is government” (McMaster University Archive 2000, 157). From this perspective, Young not only influenced the adoption of new and more productive agricultural practices but also discussed the politics of the period. Young’s thoughts on the French Revolution can also be discussed as rather provocative and reflecting the visions of Englishmen because of the developed opposition to the revolutionary change.
Therefore, the document not only influenced agricultural practices, and visions of economics in France and England but also influenced the debates related to the political stability in the European countries. Young’s document became widely spread in Europe, and it was discussed in the context of the author’s explanation of the French people’s social and economic struggles (Hoffman 1986). Thus, the choice of the document was based on its historical significance and its importance in understanding the evolution of political and economic life in the European countries during the 18th century. The document, thus, sheds light on both the political and economic aspects of Western Civilisation during the period.
Further Research
Further research on the document can require the development of skills in working with archives and primary sources and skills in interpreting and analyzing secondary sources regarding the issues addressed in the topic. It is important to work in archives and libraries to find additional primary and secondary sources. While working with archives, the assistance of librarians is necessary because access to many sources can be difficult.
It can be useful to work with sources written in the French language. Thus, the assistance of the French-speaking specialist is necessary. History research is based on examining and interpreting the evidence. That is why skills in analyzing the data should be improved.
Some kinds of secondary sources can include other historians’ interpretations and analyses of the document. Ultimately, the factual materials can be used to verify or corroborate the incidences recorded in the document. It is important to understand why Young’s conclusions are questioned by other historians. The resources essential for the research can be available via online libraries and databases. That is why the skills of working with computers and the Internet should be improved.
Considering that the time and money are not issues for further research on the document, visiting the actual sites covered in the work would be an advantage for the researcher. Thus, the other approach to finding important information is a tour to France to access important documents to support or disprove Young’s discussions. Essentially, limited skills in French can be improved with the help of the interpreter.
During the exploration of such issues as the French Revolution, visits to different French libraries would be very significant in providing the primary information. Consequently, early agriculture, culture, and social structure of French society can also be explored at the same time.
Among the other important skills necessary for the project are skilled in information collection and time management. It is important to plan how to work with the document and what information during which timeframes should be collected by the researcher.
References
Allen, Robert. “The Efficiency and Distributional Consequences of Eighteenth-Century Enclosures.” Economic Journal 92, no. 368 (1986): 937-953. Web.
Allen, Robert, and Cormac Ó Gráda. “On the Road Again with Arthur Young: English, Irish, and French Agriculture during the Industrial Revolution”. Journal of Economic History 48, no. 1 (1988): 93-116.
Bartles, Sara. “Common Land, Poor Relief and Enclosure: The Use of Manorial Resources In Fulfilling Parish Obligation, 1601-1854.” Past and Present 165, no. 1 (2001): 74-106.
Bentham-Edwards, Matilda. The Autobiography of Arthur Young. New York: A.M. Kelley Publishers, 1967.
Bloch, Marc. French Rural History: An Essay on Its Basic Characteristics. San Francisco: University of California Press, 1966.
Brunt, Liam. “Rehabilitating Arthur Young.” Economic History Review 56, no. 1 (2003): 265-99.
Doll, Dan, and Jessica Munns. Recording and Reordering: Essays on the Seventeenth- and Eighteenth-century Diary and Journal. New York: Bucknell University Press, 2006.
Fussell, George. “My Impressions of Arthur Young.” Agricultural History 17, no. 3 (1943): 135-144. Web.
Gay, Edwin. “Arthur Young on English Roads”. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 41, no. 3 (1927): 545-551.
Gazley, John. The Life of Arthur Young, 1741-1820. Philadelphia: Philadelphia Philosophical Society, 1973.
Goldsmith, John. “The Agrarian History of Preindustrial France: Where Do We Go from Here?” Journal of European Economic History 13, no. 1 (1984): 175-199.
Hoffman, Philip. “Taxes and Agrarian Life in Early Modern France: Land Sales, 1550-1730.” Journal of Economic History 46, no. 1 (1986): 37-55.
Jones, Peter. “Arthur Young (1741—1820): For and Against”. The English Historical Review 127, no. 528 (2012): 1100-1120.
Loehr, Rodney. “Arthur Young and American Agriculture”. Agricultural History 43, no. 1 (1969): 43-56.
McMaster University Archive. Arthur Young: Travels in France and Italy during the years 1787, 1788 and 1789. Hamilton: McMaster University Archive, 2000. Web.
Mingay, Gordon. Arthur Young and His Times. London: Macmillan, 1975.
Shaw-Taylor, Leigh. “Parliamentary Enclosure and the Emergence of an English Agricultural Proletariat.” The Journal of Economic History 61, no. 3 (2001): 640-662.
Taylor, Barry. Society and Economy in Early Modern Europe, 1450-1789: A Bibliography of Post-war Research. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1989.
Woodward, Carl. “A Discussion of Arthur Young and American Agriculture”. Agricultural History 43, no. 1 (1969): 57-68.
Young, Arthur. Travels during the Years 1787, 1788, & 1789: Undertaken More Particularly With A View Of Ascertaining The Cultivation, Wealth, Resources, And National Prosperity Of The Kingdom Of France. New York: W. Richardson, Royal-Exchange, 1794.