4 minute read
A history of divorce – Part 2
Following from last month's look at the collapse of long standing and beneficial English trade agreements in the 16th century, the question ‘where did England’s maritime eyes turn to next if not Europe?’ becomes ever prominent. A question similar to that which I’m sure many of you have also been grappling with other the past years. By David Bagnall
Almost exactly the same as we have done today, after exiling ourselves from the European good books, the English mercantile and political minds quickly turned themselves towards America, sending multiple colonial expeditions and scouting parties to see the lie of the land. The clearest statement about North America as a potential for developing English trade was the formation of the Plymouth and London Companies under King James I in 1606. Both were joint-stock companies, including knights, planters, settlers and merchants with the purpose of colonising and claiming the North American east coast, setting the foundations for what would develop into the Thirteen Colonies, and later the USA as we know it today.
The change to our trade characteristics that the colonisation of America brought to England can hardly be understated. Before 1600, English exports were 80-90% woollen cloth, solely to Europe, and though this didn’t end immediately – with the 1640 levels being almost the same – by the time the colonies had planted themselves firmly and become fully operational, English exports looked drastically different. Under 100 years after the royal charter was given to the London and Plymouth companies, woollen cloth had dropped to below 50% of England’s total exports, diminished almost wholly by re-exporting tobacco and sugar from the Americas.
For the whole of English trade, which had stayed at a constant for centuries, to be disrupted in such a short span of time was phenomenal, even if our imports from Europe didn’t change to a striking degree. Today, in a time where national characteristics are able to change much faster, and after a shift in the viability of our long standing trade routes, perhaps we are on the path to see something similar in the coming years.
What use is the 17th century to any understanding of today’s turmoil and changing maritime landscape? To answer that, we need to turn to the Navigation Acts of 1651 and 1660, both of which came after the nine-year long English civil war, ushering in Cromwell to be Lord Protector of The Commonwealth – I’m sure that to some Boris Johnson holds a similar position. During this time, Dutch merchants had taken serious advantage of English disunity and political upheaval to steer large portions of English colonial goods into the Netherlands and other European ports, rather than their proper destination of English ports. A state of affairs that many may feel happened during our time within the EU, with Britain enduring unfair terms, being unable to properly regain autonomy over trade which ought rightfully be ours.
The acts, both reinforcing the same legal position that all American colonial goods should be traded via English colonial ships, forced a slight bottleneck of American goods entering Europe to come through the British Isles, causing England to become a pseudo distribution base for goods from across the Atlantic. Could this be exactly what our government is looking to do today?
361 years later, and the national borders are considerably different, though we seem to find ourselves in a similar political position to centuries past. Following the past five years of relative political unrest – though admittedly nothing like
the civil war of old – with questions of sovereignty and trade security, Britain and her Prime Minister once again turns its head westward to the Americas for its main comfort.
On March 16th 2021, the UK government outlined its strategy for the development of British security, defence, development and foreign policy, and whilst this document mainly focussed on these elements, the emphasis and implications were clear.
British and American engagement is only to increase, with new levels of cooperation and integration of security and defence; the document also poses our American cousins as Britain’s most important political relation. Whilst the topic of trade is only mentioned explicitly once, the tone is clear throughout, the eye of the public is being turned to see the United States as the key to our new situation.
When lines such as “none more valuable to British citizens than our relationship with the United States” find themselves spread throughout the text, the similarities between now and the 17th century can't help but be noticed.
The potential to slip back into an age old habit is striking, especially when considering the language surrounding the issue of the two periods. Boris has clearly expressed the want to create a globally agile Britain, not being bound any longer to a singular trading bloc or area. The Navigation Acts did much the same thing, expressing a wish for self-sufficiency and ability to act on a global scene without the confines or interruptions of foreign powers when concerning our trade abilities. In turn, the stage is once again set to become America’s gateway to Europe, preparing ourselves to become the distribution centre that we were centuries ago.
Whether it be the 17th or 21st century, Britain has constantly looked to The New World to supplement un-favourable European conditions, and once again we may enter a new age of discovery when it comes to our foreign trade.
