Course:History 344 Nasty Families/Government/Monopolies

From UBC Wiki

Monopoly in Stuart England was a large part of the economic reality , flourishing under the mercantile capitalism which dominated the European theatre of trade[1]. A monopoly this time was awarded by the crown to a company – or a group of people – rather than individuals, which gave them exclusive trade rights on particular goods and products in an area/region. This could be as small as a monopoly to see within a city or parish, or as large as the entirety of British East India[2].

This was a boon to both local and archaically globalizing merchants, as it gave them exclusive rights to trade in their particular region. This allowed for a maximization of profit and little intervention required by the crown. It also created a more easily taxable system where only one company may be visited for taxes rather than many smaller merchants[3]. Monopolies were known to be given to gentry in fields such as printing in particular regions.

Monopolies were not only in terms of finances, but were part of an order of patronage. The more patronage a person would have with local lords or those with connections to the crown were often far more benefited than those without, as the largest monopolies were given to members of the peerage. It was also a monopoly of the crown to control monopolies until the end of the Civil War, where in the power went to Parliament until the restoration of the monarchy, creating a monopoly within a monopoly[4]. BN: These footnotes need the page number the info came from.

  1. Richard Rapp, “The Unmaking of the Mediterranean Trade Hegemony: International Trade Rivalry and the Commercial Revolution” (The Journal of Economic History 3, 1975).
  2. Leanna Lee-Whitman, “The Silk Trade: Chinese Silks and the British East India Company” (Winterthur Portfolio 17, 1982).
  3. Ibid.
  4. Carolyn Edie, “Tactics and Strategies: Parliament's Attack upon the Royal Dispensing Power 1597-1689” (The American Journal of Legal History 29, 1985).