Why Was There No British Revolution in Europe's 'Ageof Revolutions'?

As seen, British industrialisation had a profound effect in shaping contemporary events, in particular, it encouraged the emergence of new social groups and relationships through the changing patterns of the economy, and geographical urbanisation creating major centers of activity such as Manchester and Birmingham. In France, the revolution was led by a middle class ‘Third Estate’ and was fuelled by peasant discontent. Britain had no such leading middle class intent on overthrowing the existing order, and as already seen, economic crisis was not a factor encouraging a relatively apathetic population into supporting them. The 19th Century sees the birth of an English working class, and an emerging middle class of professionals, whom both become ‘politicised’ in this era. Thompson is among many historians who argue that this new middle class proved a restraining influence on revolutionary threats, in particular from the 1820’s onwards as their calls for  reform altered  common perceptions of what constituted revolutionary and radical. The growth and strength of such a middle class can be seen to indicate a political stability in Britain, one which was furthered by the relative unity of the middle and upper classes against the radical demands of industrial workers and revolutionary groups in this period.*example*, and as already seen, the middle classes in Britain urged reform for their own benefit, not for that of the working classes, alleviating the potential for a revolutionary coalition of the two classes. The beginnings of a British working class can be seen in the Chartists, a group with definite political aims expressed in their charter, such as universal manhood suffrage and the abolition of property qualifications. Much debate has surrounded modern interpretations of Chartism, and whether or not it can be seen as a class movement or as a revolutionary group with radical aims. It could be argued that if Chartism was primarily a development of class consciousness, rather than a political movement, then they posed no serious revolutionary threat; in order to rouse widespread rebellion, a common political ideology is necessary. Chartism offered no political economy alternative to the liberal bourgeoisie, for example, socialism, and thus perhaps the lack of a revolution can be attributed to the apolitical nature of many British groups and movements. Conversely, if we are to interpret a political intention in Chartism, looking specifically to their aims, we must bear in mind that their demands weren’t new or revolutionary, and that ideas of universal suffrage and the secret ballot had been in existence since the mid 18th Century and in this period had been spreading across Europe. Hence, debate continues over whether or not the Chartists would even constitute the term of a political movement, let alone one which posed a serious revolutionary threat. Although their actions did indicate * example* a political tone – were any attempts made to gain power. As Rude has noted, ‘there was no revolution because nobody of importance wanted one’ , a quote which clearly illustrates the influence of class on the development and implementation of revolution.

The nature of radical British movements, such as Chartism and the middle class demands for reform in the 1830’s, must be examined in order to illustrate why there was no revolution in Britain while they simultaneously swept over the continent. Overwhelmingly, it is the internal weaknesses and shortcomings of individual groups as much as repressive government policies that rendered mass political activity a failure, a view supported by historians such as Holt and Thomis. Radical movements throughout our epoch stemmed largely from the economic conditions of industrialisation, such as the newly formed trade unions and the anti Corn Law riots which, as examined, produced a new set of class structures and relationships. Fundamentally, popular protest in Britain found itself in a minority position that lacked the mass support of a population which was overwhelmingly apolitical and apathetic. In order for a revolution to occur and be sustained, it must have widespread support which proved impossible in Britain due to the highly localised nature of much rebellion. For example, the industrial violent unrest of the Luddites, which was contained largely to areas such as Nottingham and Yorkshire, failing to expand activities to the political capital, essential to a revolutionary movement. The Luddites were further weakened by a lack of organisation, a result of the highly sporadic nature of their violent protest, and no definite political orientation. Moreover, there was a definitive lack of strong leadership in radical groups across Britain, a fact reiterated by Royle who suggests there were ‘no common objectives, no united organisation, and no accepted leadership’ leading to the eventual disintegration of these radical movements. Luddism with its violent, relatively apolitical protest can be seen more as a threat to the orders of society than to British political stability. Further internal weaknesses can be found in the schisms and ideological divides within movements such as the Chartists, explicitly serving to undermine their demands, aims and actions * example *. Royle further argues that there was a common failure among the British radicals to synchonise their actions, resulting in the division rather than coalition of the revolutionary opposition. In addition, revolutionary threats could be seen throughout our period, in particular, around 1811-12, 1831-32 and the early 1840’s – yet perhaps one of the most restraining forces was the nature of discontent, usually more industrial and economic than political; this was coupled with a general inability to transfer socio-economic malaise into political aims and demands resulting in a distinct pattern of inability to materialise grievances among the British radical movements. Indeed, as Calhoun persuasively argues, the working class radicals did not pose a revolutionary threat due to such weaknesses inherent to the movement; instead they served to unite the middle classes in opposition and force them to clearly define their own politics. In this situation compromise and reforms could then be made to appease the working classes as they did throughout the 1830’s for example with the Poor Law Amendment Act, and with the extension of the vote to urban workers which occurred in 1867. Thus we see the theme of reform, and a relationship between class and government policy which combined served to shape the events of 19th Century Britain.  

 The shortcomings and weaknesses of protest organisations were underlined by simultaneous government policies of repression and concession, which served to both restrict the swell of public opposition, and create support, in particular among the middle classes with the Reform Bill of 1832 which Rude has suggested ‘saved’ the country from revolution. Revolutionary opposition was often shown through radical press, for example with newspapers such as The Poor Man’s Guardian; also, the formation of political clubs and societies throughout the period 1789-1848 such as the London Corresponding Society, Birmingham Political Union and Hampden clubs which all served as a vehicle for popular discontent and political discussion. The government employed many measures such as undercover spies, or agent provocateurs to expose radical plots, and passed laws to restrict mass meetings, and encourage sentencing of radical leaders such as Tom Paine. The Combination Acts of 1799 served to promote government control over workers protests and mass meetings, as did the introduction of the Metropolitan Police in London. Throughout the 1840’s once moderate reform had already been employed concessions were gradually made towards the working classes, such as the repeal of the Corn Laws by Peel. However, prior to this the government’s laws which prohibited and restricted radical activity, served to drive many movements underground as it became increasingly illegal to oppose the government. Thus as the groups and movements lost open publicity, so they lost their following, resulting in the ultimate breakdown of already fragile and limited organisations.

While employing tactics to constrain revolutionary thought and popular protest, the government also sought to appease the middle classes, most notable with the Reform Bill, introduced at a crucial time when revolutions were sweeping across Europe. This lead to important support from the middle classes, although it did serve to antagonise many working class groups, for example the Chartists, who saw it as a government betrayal. However, despite the continuing opposition of groups like the Chartists into the late 1840’s the government seemed to find a balance which repressed many radical orgainsations, yet also bought support under them from those who could have led the country into revolution. It has been suggested that ‘[t]he middle classes were so strong that they had to be accommodated. The working classes were so weak that they could be disregarded’. Evidently, the government’s decisions and policies during this period struck a lucky middle ground which avoided the threats of rebellion and protest successfully breaking down much political activity, using repression towards the working classes and making concessions to the middle classes. It can also be argued that the government in Britain was supported by the strong structures of civil society which acted as a defense against popular protest. Moreover, that throughout this era a revolutionary mentality was very much the minority viewpoint with no widespread or sustained support; indeed, even at its height, the L.C.S only had around 10,000 members, illustrating the limitations placed on radical groups by society itself, suggested by some to be the result of a naturally conservative British nature. Loyalist tendencies and outbursts of patriotic waves, especially during the Napoleonic wars were common exemplified by patriotic songs * example *

This leads us to the ongoing debate in historical circles. Revolutionary groups, societies and individuals posed a very real threat to Britain’s stability during ‘the age of revolution’. The Chartists in particular fused social and economic concerns with political demands, a threat embodied in the Newport uprising, while the middle classes pioneered for moderate reform continuously during these years. However, as Hobsbawn notes ‘without profound social and cultural discontents, ready to emerge at a relatively slight impetus, there can be no major social revolutions’ and it is certain that Britain in this period, did not have widespread and sustained discontent. Pockets of economic recession provoked insurrections which may have been interpreted by contemporaries as revolutionary and thus provoked a strong reaction by the government, but they lacked the arms, leadership, organisation and political ideology necessary to rebel. What was ostensibly revolutionary, such as Luddite activity, was only so due to an image of violence threatening to emulate the revolutions breaking regimes across the continent. Insurrections in the navy, and among industrial workers did show a potential for challenging British stability, yet Britain’s path was one of reform – the primary reason behind its avoidance of revolution. As Rude accurately states, ‘Revolutionary change granted by a government of its free will is not a revolution’. Thus the changes which occurred throughout the period 1789-1848 do not literally count as revolutions because they do not involve an established power being overthrown, yet Britain did still experience an enormous transformation in society, politics and the economy throughout ‘the age of revolution’.

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

C. Calhoun: The Question of Class Struggle (Oxford 1982)

D. Hay & N. Rogers: Eighteenth Century English Society (Oxford 1997)

M. Thomis & P. Holt: Threats of Revolution in Britain 1789-1848 (London 1977)

N. Rogers: Crowds , Culture and Politics in Georgian Britain (Oxford 1998)

E. Royle: Revolutionary Britannia? (Manchester 2000)

G. Rude: The Face of the Crowd. (U.K. 1988)

G. Williams: Artisans and Sans Culottes (London 1968)

---