Explaining Famine

Abstract This chapter concerns discussion of scarcity and the threat of famine in Britain’s newspapers and print culture from the food riots of 1756–7 up until the crisis years of the 1790s. The chapter argues that in Britain, particularly among middle and wealthy classes—those who consumed and contributed to the burgeoning print culture—the idea of ‘artificial scarcity’ enjoyed widespread popularity. When famine threatened Britain, anthropogenic causes like greed, hoarding, and market manipulation were blamed. Such accusations might appear to hold radical connotations—but in fact, the idea of artificial scarcity was ubiquitous in the press during this time, and also appeared in family correspondence. When news of the 1770 Bengal famine reached Britain, it too was explained by appeal to familiar concepts of hoarding, market manipulation, and greed that were so often used to explain high food prices locally. Making use of Jessica Riskin’s concept of sentimental empiricism, I argue in this chapter that explanations of famine and scarcity during this period depended upon sensory experience, personal witness, and narrative. This chapter provides a foundation for the larger argument of the book that more complex and statistically mediated explanations of famine and scarcity became increasingly useful to political and commercial powers like the East India Company. In the final sections of the chapter, I show that—particularly in the metropolis—there was increasing sentiment and trust in explanations of famine and scarcity that appealed to natural weather events. At the same time, ideas of ‘artificial’ scarcity were also becoming diverse, with new interpretations of the familiar accusation appearing in the work of Adam Smith and revised explanations of famine emerging from Company officials.