Why Did the Population Grow in Britain Between 1700 and 1950?

In: Historical Events

Submitted By ElaCool
Words 326
Pages 2
Why Did The Population Grow In Britain Between 1700 And 1950?

Between 1750 and 1900 the population of the United Kingdom went up drastically, giving it the name of population explosion. The government started to take a census of the population at this time. From this information we can see the population of Britain went from around 6million in 1750 to 40 million by 1900.
There were many effects that caused this; improvements in agriculture, hygiene, medical care, peoples health, the industrial revolution and young marriage. These changes in industry, medicine and social lives were the causes of the fall in death rate and the rise in the birth rate and these two factors along with immigration brings up the population of a country. However net immigration was at a very small rate and so this was not the cause for the population explosion, if anything more people were leaving the United Kingdom.
Due to warmer weather and improvements in machinery, (seed drill, fertilisers and cross breeding of animals) farmers produced more food for people. This was the agricultural revolution. This then reduced the risk of famine, starvation or malnutrition. By improving people diets, the death rate was reduced, helping the population to grow. From 1750 younger people started to get married earlier than normal. This left more time in their life to start a family and therefore increasing the birth rate of the country. Huge improvements were made to the medical world. To start with in 1796 Dr.Jenner came up with a vaccination for smallpox, one of the big killers. In 1870 it was made compulsory and suddenly it disappeared. By introducing this vaccination less people died of smallpox, leading to a fall in the death rate. After 1750 improvements were made to the care of pregnant women. Some hospitals introduced maternity beds. Doctors also introduced anaesthetics to dull the pain.…...

Similar Documents

Explain Why Britain Did Not Intervene When Germany Re-Militarised the Rhineland in 1936 (12 Marks)

...Britain didn’t intervene when Germany remilitarised Rhineland for a few reasons. One being that relations with Germany had vastly improved since the Versailles and Locarno treaty. With Germany not being considered a great threat to European peace. We know this as Germany had a restricted amount of troops (100,000) and no air force under the Versailles treaty. This tells us Britain didn’t intervene when Germany remilitarised the Rhineland they were presumed not to be a threat. Another reason is that British Government agreed with Public opinion of that its German land so why can’t they occupy it. We know this was the case as a taxi driver once said to Chamberlain, that Germany was only marching into “their own backyard”. Considering the public opinion was for pacifism they would agree to do nothing and therefore the Government would follow suit to keep supports happy. My third reason for Baldwin not acting upon Germany was because he didn’t know that Hitler would have withdrew his troops if France or Britain had taken action upon Germany. We know this because many historians discovered that Hitler once told a group of guest whilst having dinner soon after the event. Although Hitler was renowned for over exaggerating or lying to make Germany sound greater or other countries weaker as historians also discovered. My final point is that Britain were already following an approach of appeasement towards Hitler’s Germany. This is to keep the peace and try and use him as a......

Words: 386 - Pages: 2

How and Why Did the Nazi Treatment of Jews Change Between the Years 1933 and 1945?

...| How and why did the Nazi treatment of Jews change between the years 1933 and 1945? | Curran De Braganca | How and why did the Nazi treatment of Jews change between the years 1933 and 1945? Most of us have heard of the Nazi party’s horrific, genocidal regime on destroying the Jewish race, but what events led up to their dire judgement? In this study I aim to uncover the events, reasons and changes which led to the Holocaust and the further changes in the treatment of the Jewish race by Adolf Hitler and the Nazi party. In the aftermath of the First World War, Germany is under the Judgment of the Allies as a result of Allied victory Germany is being blamed for most of the war, The Treaty of Versailles stated that they: * Are to pay compensation to the Allies: £6.6 Million, which was well over Germany’s financial capacity at the time. * Portions of Germany’s land has been claimed and will distributed under Allied power to form new nations and also will be given to allied nations who lost land during the war. * Germany’s army will be reduced to only 100,000 men plus their naval vessels have been limited to 6 capital ships. The west of Rhineland had been Demilitarised and occupied by Allied forces. * Germany was not allowed to join with Austria to boost its economy. These were only just a few of the terms of the treaty. In Germany, many people were ‘pointing fingers’ and putting the blame on others, one group of people however, is taking...

Words: 3106 - Pages: 13

Why Did I Get Married

...the midst of searching for gold in the south -east region of north America Hernando did not find what he was looking for but encountered some cherokee Indians which then shared A meal with them.Surprised that the indians weren't secretly rich Hernando and his soldiers were so upset at the fact they couldn't find gold mines that really did not exsist that they killed many Cherokees. Later on in the 1600's contact with the europeans increased. The French and English joined the Spanish in North America. Traders traveled to the Indian territory seeking furs. In return, the Cherokee received Iron, tools, guns and alcohol. Some traders even chose to stay and live with the indians married and mixed breed. The children of these mixed marriages took their fathers' names and inherited their goods {text:soft-page-break} and wealth. Some of the sons of the white men and cherokee woman adopted the european habits. During th 1700s, England and france competed for the control of north America. The two of which turned to the American Indian Tribes. At first, the Cherokee supported the french, but the English tried to recruit the Cherokee as allies. These Indians were respected warriors and good trading partners. However the friendship between the Cherokee and the English could not save the Cherokees from the terrible devastation. The Disease In the same 1700s, The Europeans carried a disease called smallpox, measles, and bubonic plague to......

Words: 1296 - Pages: 6

Explain Why Britain Did Not Intervene When Germany Re-Militarised the Rhineland in 1936?

...Explain why Britain did not intervene when Germany re-militarised the Rhineland in 1936? After World War 1, Germany was forced to sign a document known as the Treaty of Versailles. This treaty prohibited a lot of things that Germany had such as taking away land mass and reducing military size. One of the things that were banned was the ability to field a military force in the Rhineland. One of the reasons that Britain did not want to intervene when Germany re-militarised the Rhineland is that relations with Germany had improved vastly since the imposition of the Treaty of Versailles and the Locarno Treaty, with Germany not being considered a great threat to European peace despite the rhetoric of Hitler and the Nazi regime. So it would have been counterproductive to intervene when relations where getting a lot better and would possibly have led to another war. Another reason that Britain did not intervene when Germany re-militarised the Rhineland was because the British government was already following a policy of appeasement towards Nazi Germany which was started by Neville Chamberlain. He believed that following this policy which meant giving Nazi Germany what they wanted would ease them into good relations so that they would not take revenge on Britain and France, this was a very popular at the time but obviously from hindsight it did not work. Furthermore, the government shared the view with many in Britain that Germany was entitled to reoccupy its ‘own......

Words: 424 - Pages: 2

Why Did Chartism Fail?

...Why did Chartism Fail? * Chartism failed because of economic factors – it was simply a ‘knife and fork question’ * Chartism failed because of the inherent weakness of the movement and internal divisions within the movement * Chartism did not really fail in the truest sense of the word – it was defeated by the state Economic Factors Some historians have argued that improving economic conditions ensured the Chartist movement faded after 1848 – there had been worsening economic conditions in the period after 1837 which gave rise to the chartist movement. After this period, the lessening economic instability, growing prosperity and rise in living standards after 1848 removed basis for widespread discontent. In economic prosperity – Chartism could no longer be sustained. The interpretation has been questioned in recent decades – economic historians began questioning how stable the British economy really was during this time in ‘Mid-Victorian Boom’ (1850-73) e.g. Cunningham – disagrees as he believes the economy continued to fluctuate. A series of subtle economic changes undermined the movement after 1848 and led to the movement’s eventual fall. 1. Development of Railways – Provided stimulus to industries; iron, steel and coal. Economic growth less narrowly based than in period before 1850 when textiles had been leading sector 2. Factory Legislation – Legislation redefined management practices and relationships in the workplace; 1850s-60s saw......

Words: 1639 - Pages: 7

Why Did Yannis Fail

...authentic traditional Gyro meat. However, it lacked a true leadership structure and inexperienced business owners. Though, I was not involved in the planning and set up of this particular restaurant, I did start within a month of this company being open. The company from the outside looked very sound, well planned, and greatly loved, however, once I began to poke around and learn the ins and outs of this company it was easy to see that there was major lacking in the management side of the company and a lack in the planning process. “Planning is a systematic process in which managers make decisions about future activities and the key goals that the organization intends to pursue.” (Reilly, Baack, & Minnick, 2014). Planning functions as the foundation for the remaining management functions, organizing, staffing, leading, and controlling. It gives direction for a company, as well as escalates an organizations chance for a higher success rate and potential to accomplishing its goals. Why did Yanni’s Fail on Planning? The first problem that this company possessed is that the owners had an idea what they wanted, but strayed away from it. They wanted a true Greek style fast food joint, but fell far from it. They had too many items on the menu and only two that were Greek. They were a cross between a small diner and a McDonalds. This created confusion for the customers as there were too many items to choose from. This also created confusion for some of the employees as there......

Words: 3701 - Pages: 15

When Did Britain Become a Democracy?

...When Did Britain Become A Democracy? A democracy is a system of government where the majority of the population has the right to vote for government representatives from several political parties. There was a situation in the 1820s that caused problems to the people in Britain some of them were: no women were allowed to vote, nobody who voted could keep their vote a secret and that only men had the right to become MPs. These are just a few but you can imagine how many more there are. From Sir Philip Francis we can tell that barely any people voted because he said that “I was elected by one voter to represent this borough in parliament. There was no other candidate or opposition.” I think that this should not have happened in 1820 because they were being sexist. For me I find this a terrible thing like racism. The 1832 Reform Act (a.k.a Great Reform Act). This reform act was an act of parliament. Most argue that it did not lead to lots if quick changes it got people more convinced that they have the right to vote as well not just men who were rich. After this there were two more reform acts. Chartism was a working-class movement for political reform in Britain between 1838 and 1848 which took its name from the People's Charter of 1838. The Chartists made ‘The Peoples Charter’ it consisted of six basic reforms which were: Every man over 21 who is not a criminal or insane should be allowed to vote, voting should be done in secret, candidates should not need to be rich or......

Words: 945 - Pages: 4

Why Did the Us Become Increasingly Involved in South East Asia in the 1950s?

...During the 1950s America became more and more drawn in to the conflict in Vietnam. Eisenhower was immediately put under pressure not to lose Vietnam to communism in the same way that Truman was perceived to have lost China before him - the American fear of a communist conspiracy was a major factor in the country’s continual support for the containment of it in Asia, regardless of the costs. Other factors that lead to an increase in American involvement in South East Asia included their support of the French in Indo-China until 1954, their response to the Geneva Accords 1954 and the formation of SEATO also in 1954. Arguably the most important reason for the US becoming increasingly involved in South-East Asia during the ‘50s was the perceived threat that communism posed. There was a widespread fear in America that there was a global threat of communism, which would destroy capitalist American values, being orchestrated from Moscow. This fear was worsened by the 12 year long conflict in Malaya between Britain and communist forces which started in 1948. This anti-communist sentiment was collated into the “Domino Theory” which suggested if one nation fell to communism, others would follow – Vice President Nixon visited Vietnam in 1953 and announced in a national TV broadcast upon his return that “If Indo-China goes under communist domination the whole of South East Asia will be threatened”, thus confirming the public’s fears and compelling greater US involvement in South......

Words: 914 - Pages: 4

Why Was Jcb's Strategy in India a Success? Same with Jollibee, Yet Why Did Tesco Succeed in Great Britain but Fail in the U.S?

...Why was JCB's strategy in India a success? Same with Jollibee, yet why did Tesco succeed in Great Britain but fail in the U.S? JCB entered the Indian market in 1979 via a joint venture with Escorts. The decision to enter via a joint venture arrangement was prompted by high tariff barriers that made JCB’s traditional strategy of exporting its product to foreign locations difficult. Given that JCB was primarily an exporter and had little experience operating in foreign locations, the joint venture arrangement offered the company a means of serving the Indian market without incurring all the risk involved in setting up a wholly owned operation. Until its joint venture with Escorts, JCB had been exporting its equipment from Great Britain to a number of foreign locations. JCB’s experience in actually operating in India gave it the means to not only establish wholly owned operations there, but also to expand into China via a wholly owned subsidiary. JCB was able to match its global rivals and become one of the major players in the global construction equipment industry. A big part of Jollibee Foods’ success has been the development of market-leading brands across several categories. Jollibee outlets accounted for 49% of the company’s sales, as of September, and that share is slipping as the rest of its brand portfolio–both in the Philippines and abroad–grows faster. In the Philippines the company boasts Chinese fast-food chain Chow King, Red Ribbon bakeries, Mang Inasal......

Words: 694 - Pages: 3

Why Did the Usa Get Involved in Asia in 1950?

...Why did the USA get involved in Asia in 1950? (30) After the end of the Second World War, the two war time allies the USA and Soviet Union became involved in a war of ideologies, the cold war. The US saw communism as a threat to democracy and capitalism. Therefore the US set out a new foreign policy, the policy of containment, in the Truman doctrine. There were however other reasons for the USA’s involvement such as their military confidence, UN agreement, domestic pressure which called for Truman to be more tough on communism and their economic interest in Japan which led to the US government’s decision to intervene in the Korean War. One of the main reasons for the US’s involvement was due to the ‘Policy of Containment’. The aim was for the USA to work with its allies to contain the spread of communism in eastern Europe and Asia using political, economic and if necessary military pressure to prevent the spread of the every growing ideology of communism. The US’s main worry was the communism would spread as most of the eastern European countries were devastated by the war were weak and communism could easily spread through these weakened countries such as Hungary. Europe was divided by ‘an Iron curtain’, the west with capitalism views, and the east with growing communism views. Furthermore, China had fallen to Communism under Mao, which may have been a huge wake up call for President Truman. In addition, Mao had signed the treaty of friendship with Stalin; therefore the......

Words: 896 - Pages: 4

How Did Tensions Between Britain and the Colonies Rise in the Late 1760’s and Early 1770’s?

...Haleigh Denny Ms. Powers History 1483 8 February 2015 Topic 4: Revolution How did tensions between Britain and the colonies rise in the late 1760’s and early 1770’s? Life for colonists after the Seven Year’s War was prosperous for a short time period. Many had made fortunes with military contracts to the British crown during the war, even with the heavy taxes already on the colonists. The colonists who had supported England in the war against France hoped to gain access to lands further west of the colonies that were acquired from the war. England however, had gained major debt and looked to the colonies for assistance in paying off their bills with more taxes upon the colonies. In the early 1760’s, bickering and arguments between the colonists and England occurred. A large part of the problem was the Stamp Act. This policy from England imposed high taxes on the colonists without any representation in Parliament. The colonies, which once struggled to get along without bickering, began to unite themselves and push back on the Crown. Groups such as the Sons of Liberty and Daughters of Liberty were formed. The colonists imposed a boycott on English goods and refused to use the stamps on legal documents that were required under the Stamp Act. England was surprised by the colonist’s reactions and repealed it in March 1766. In 1767, Charles Townsend was named Prime Minister of England. Colonists were hopeful he would be their supporter because he had opposed both the......

Words: 704 - Pages: 3

Why Was the South Segregated in 1950

...Why was the South segregated in 1950 After the civil war the South introduced laws, which were called Jim Crow laws. These laws forced segregation of the blacks in the South. With the start of segregation of blacks the civil right movement started. The peak of segregation was during 1950s. The South promoted segregation with saying that the segregate but the facilities, which the blacks had to use were equal. This was a big lie. In this essay I try to explain the major reasons why there was segregation in the South during the 1950s. Before the American Civil War the South had a big plantation economy, where they planted rice, sugar, cotton, tabacco and the major plantation economy in the South, sugar. The plantation economy was the biggest economy in the South due to the climate and it was the closest point to Africa from the New World called USA. The short distance to Africa pushed Slavery in the USA. All the owners of the plantation had African slaves who worked for them. This changed after the Civil War when Slavery got abolished and therefore the plantation economy ended. The plantation economy ended because the whites believed that this was only a job for blacks. As I mentioned earlier was the plantation economy the biggest economy in the South but when Slavery ended the South got poor, farming rural area. Moreover the South believed in the supremacy of the white race and they were in fear when slavery ended that this system could get mixed up therefor the......

Words: 763 - Pages: 4

Why Did Hitler Loose the War

...World War Two was not only a loss on behalf of the country as a whole, but a personal loss to Hitler. Why was this such a loss to Hitler? Why did he experience a personal downfall? How did he create his own demise? There are many reasons as to why this is so, but the fact that his ideas were behind the war is a reason why it was not only Germany's downfall, but Hitler's also. He was a man of influence in Germany; the timing was right, and he was in the hot spot. He was the leader of a highly populated European country, he wanted more for himself and for his people. He had ideas, he made decisions based on them. What were his ideas? What was behind them, what did he intend them to accomplish? Where did they lead, and how did this lead to a countrywide and worldwide loss, and even a personal loss? In discussing some of Hitler's ideas such as, lebensraum (which ties in with treaty issues), purity of the state of Germany and a zeal for his people and the desire to make changes for the betterment of his country; it will be seen that although his ideas might have been initally pure, they led to the war, the downfall of Germany and ultimately Hitler's own personal demise. What were his ideas? What were his visions for a more pure Germany? What did he want for his people, for himself? Firstly, today, Hitler is seen as a white supremacist. He wanted all of Germany to be pure. Why was this so? In Germany at the time, the economic status of the country was not very good.......

Words: 1578 - Pages: 7

When and Why Did London Grow so Much Faster Than Other Early Modern Capitals?

...Qihui Zheng 01/28/2011 EH205 Essay 2 When and why did London grow so much faster than other early modern capitals? By examine the key differences among Paris, Madrid, and London, I argue that from1650 to1750, the reason why London boosted in terms of demographic expansion and market integrations is that -- instead of creating market disorder by demanding cheap supply of goods from other places, emphasizing social privileges and over consumptions, London attracted spontaneous business exchange in market among different groups of people. In section I, by doing a brief literature review on E. A. Wrigley, D. R. Ringrose and other important authors, we may have a basic understanding of the demand and supply market mechanism and its relationship with population, internal market and functions of capitals. In section II, we will analyze how the functions of capital, such as exercising political power to satisfy a particular interest, can affect the demand and supply of market and demographic composition. In section III, we study further how the functions of capital such as price determination can change the economic development of the capital itself and its surrounding industrial and agricultural areas. At the end, we should see that London did a better job integrating the urban-rural market during 1650-1750. Literature Review From 1650 to 1750, London grew much faster than other continental capital cities. There is little debate on the time as shown in table 1 and 2......

Words: 1951 - Pages: 8

Why Did the Us Experience an Economic Boom in the 1950s and 60s

...Why did the US experience an economic boom in the 1950s and 1960s? The primary reason the US experienced an economic boom during the 1950s and 1960s was the effect that World War II had on the US economy. During World War II there was very low unemployment as many men were drafted into the military. Women and those remaining men got jobs in factories manufacturing arms for those fighting. Much of the money they earned was saved as there was little to spend it on during the war period. By 1945 $140 billion was held in private savings. These savings were used after the war to boost consumer spending. After the war the US economy grew as there was little damage to mainland USA and thus no money was spent on reconstructing factories, houses and public infrastructure as had to be done across the UK and mainland Europe. Due to the damage caused to Europe there was a large increase in US exports to Europe as European countries were unable to manufacture goods whilst they rebuilt their factories and infrastructure. The Marshall Plan was a programme for European recovery which gave European countries money to their economies. It is widely thought that the US did this partly for their own benefit. They knew that with this money European countries would buy goods from US factories as they needed to rebuild their factories, this would mean that jobs would be created as there was higher demand for goods. Investment in advancing technology would occur and more tax could be collected......

Words: 431 - Pages: 2

Access this essay | Siêu nhiên - Supernatural | DJSBUZZ - India