The Age of Atonement: The Influence of Evangelicalism on Social and Economic Thought, 1785-1865

The Age of Atonement: The Influence of Evangelicalism on Social and Economic Thought, 1785-1865

The Age of Atonement: The Influence of Evangelicalism on Social and Economic Thought, 1785-1865

The Age of Atonement: The Influence of Evangelicalism on Social and Economic Thought, 1785-1865

Synopsis

In this study of the British upper and middle classes during the first half of the 19th century, Boyd Hilton reveals that the people of this age were obsessed with catastrophe: wars, famines, pestilences, revolutions, floods, volcanoes, and the great commercial upheavals which periodically threatened to topple the world's first capitalist system. The dominant evangelical sentiment of the day interpreted such sufferings as part of God's plan and, not wanting to interfere with the dispensations of providence, governments took a harsh, stand-on-your-own-feet attitude towards social underdogs, whether they were bankrupts or paupers. In this work, Hilton studies how the transformation of religious thought--including new ideas about the nature of God and the Atonement--affected the economics, philosophy, science, and politics of the period.

Excerpt

If every author were required to print a correct account of his cerebral development in his preface, a great saving of discussion might be effected.

The Phrenological Journal and Miscellany 3 (1825-6), 51

Many years ago I started researching for a doctoral thesis on economic policies between 1815 and 1830. That period saw the cautious beginnings of policies which were to characterize the Victorian Pax Britannica -- Free Trade, laissez-faire, sound money, and public retrenchment. I started out by asking several fairly mechanical questions about the process of policy formation. Were governments responding to pressure from extra- parliamentary lobbies? Did policy emerge through a process of political manœuvre, either at ministerial or parliamentary level? Was there a conscious application of economic doctrine, and how far did unconscious assumptions about the nature of the economy and society affect the outcome? My answers to these questions were largely negative, for most policies seemed to result from the pragmatic responses of officially minded ministers faced with practical problems like those of food supply, monetary instability, public indebtedness, a confusing and inefficient tariff.

And yet this conclusion was not entirely satisfactory, if only because years of academic cohabitation with those Tory ministers had left me with a strong impression of ideological differentiation. Liverpool, Canning, Huskisson, Wallace, Peel, Robinson, Dudley, Grant, and Goulburn, those so-called Liberal Tories who were mainly responsible for the new economic policies, seemed temperamentally different from their more paternalistic and protectionist colleagues -- Castlereagh, Wellington, Eldon, Sidmouth, Bathurst, Ellenborough, and Vansittart. But is temperament the same thing as ideology? I returned to what I had written and discovered that at several points I had in fact attributed an implicit ideology to my Liberal Tories. This was at moments when they had acted with unnecessary fervour, as over the 1819 decision to resume cash payments, or else in irrational ways, as when in the summer of 1826 they had almost allowed the Government to break up over the question of issuing exchequer bills to firms in temporary trouble. In order to explain such things it was necessary to examine their often unspoken assumptions about economic . . .

Search by... Author
Show... All Results Primary Sources Peer-reviewed

Oops!

An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.