Abstract
Gregory Clark's conclusion that the financial advantages of enclosure have been exaggerated may well have some validity, but the evidence which he offers in support is far less convincing than he supposes. There are serious problems with some of the basic assumptions which he makes in reaching his conclusion. Clark's argument rests on three interlinked propositions. First, he states that For the years after 1720 the predominant way that common land became private was through the process of parliamentary enclosure. Second, he proposes that the charities' experience of enclosure equates with the general experience.3 Third, given these two propositions, he argues that the rent patterns shown in the records of the charities before and after enclosure offer a valid picture of the gain from enclosure as a whole. None of these propositions can stand unchallenged.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
