The emergence of a middle class transformed British Society from a patriarchal two class

system to a capitalist three class system. Not only was the social hierarchy changed, but so were

the attitudes towards community, interpersonal relationships, religious and philosophical

ideologies, as well as attitudes towards business. While these metaphysical changes were

happening, there was also a shift in industry and population from a rural agrarian setting to an

urban industrial setting. For the first time in British history, a substantial portion of the

population that was not of the nobility or gentry was beginning to not only gain wealth but also

to seek political representation and to spread their philosophies to the masses. No longer were

men of Britain strictly confined to the social strata they were born into; the new “self made man”

became the epitome of the middle class ideology and well embodied the change in British

Society. This idea of “making” led to changes in what a man could expect from his life: he could

choose his social standing and wealth, therefore he should also be allowed to choose his religion,

his political leaders, his livelihood, and his community. This shift in what individuals viewed as

their personal rights also began a long term internal stability within Britain, at first strained and

inconsistent, as people began to be drawn together into groups focused on building wealth and

spreading their vision of propriety and respectability.

Before the middle class, the distance in wealth and prestige from the top to the bottom of

the social hierarchy was enormous1. As more and more men participated in trade and gained

wealth, a new group began to emerge. They were not serfs dependent on land owners for their

livelihoods while teetering on the edge of desolation, and they were not of noble or genteel birth

with solid resources and social standing. These men greatly aspired to the status of the nobility/

1Thomas William Heyck, The Peoples of the British Isles: A New History from 1688 to 1870(Chicago:
Lyceum Books, Inc., 2002) 48

1
gentry and were in constant threat of loosing their hard earned success. These men wanted to

become land owners, with the goal of gaining social status and the ability to vote. Because of

economic pressures on the landowning elite, such as high taxes due to war and the burden of not

being able to work for a living, the more wealthy business men were able to purchase property.

This slowly introduced them into the political sphere, as the reins of power moved from the

monarch to the House of Lords, and finally to the House of Commons. At the same time, the

hereditary landowners began to think more like these up and coming businessmen and so started

restructuring their farming systems to be more profitable. This restructuring led to changes in

the paternalist relationship that landowners had with their tenants, while leading to increased

revenues.

As the scope of commerce grew, the industrial and agricultural revolutions created

machinery that could mass produce products, and farming became more efficient. This was

encouraged by a great need for more product output as the domestic market grew (due to a

growing middle class with disposable income), and free trade became the vanguard by which

Britain interacted with the rest of the world (in order to gain cheap raw materials). This led to a

decrease in agricultural jobs and an increase in factory positions for the working class, while at

the same time creating new management and ownership positions for the growing middle class.

“The expansion of economic opportunities caused the middling sorts to proliferate”2 , and as the

job market changed so did the housing market. People began migrating from the countryside

into cities, and the cities became disgusting and so those that could moved into the suburbs.

Cities were never known for their sanitary living conditions, but they had significantly worsened.

2 Heyck 191

2
The nobility and gentry had stayed in the country and fine London homes. The cities were

reserved for the destitute working class, and suburbs were created for the new middle class. This

further solidified their ranks as a new social group and also spoke greatly to the new attitude that

the poor should not be acknowledged and assisted, but rather should be punished for their failure

to better themselves. Close knit country communities were replaced by impersonal city living,

leaving many feeling alienated and in search of community.

The most profound shift, due to the emergence of the middle class, was the change in

personal relationships. The paternalist landlords had become employers, small close knit

communities were dissolved, and family relationships were restructured. Before the middle class

became a dominant social reality, personal relationships were built on long standing traditions

that were at odds with the realities of capitalism. As the growing middle class struggled in it’s

goal to be like the upper class, they further distanced themselves from the working class. How

out of touch with the working class they quickly became is clear in Friedrich Engels The

Condition of the Working Class in England in 1844: “the English middle classes prefer to ignore

the distress of the workers, and this is particularly true of the industrialists, who grow rich on the

misery of the mass of wage earners. . . . The middle classes are living in frivolous unconcern”3.

He was a bit off here; it wasn’t unconcern that characterized the middle class. They were very

concerned with the poor. The confusion is more that they felt an obligation to provide charity to

those in need, while simultaneously despising them. The sense of obligation perhaps stemmed

from the old system of providing care for the poor in the community, but in a more modern and

tangible sense it was linked to the evangelizing efforts of those moved by religious fervor. The

3Walter L. Arnstein, The Past Speaks Since 1688: Sources and Problems in British History(Lexington,
MA: D.C. Heath and Company, 1981) 177

3
poor were despised because although they were able to do so, they refused to better themselves.

Instead they were happy to burden those who were better off by living on charity. This lead to

hardened attitudes to the poor; no longer where they misfortunate members of society who

needed the caring support of their neighbors, but were now detestable and should be punished for

their lazy attitude. The poor weren’t the only group to enjoy a reduction is social status; women

and children also lost ground. Because of the changes in working conditions, families no longer

functioned as a unit. In the middle class aspirations, to become more like the nobility and gentry,

it became a sign of status that women and children of the family did not work.

With the new middle class came a group of people who had free time and free capital.

The children that should not work were sent to school. “Education was crucial to middle-class

males, both because of their belief in individualism and because of their work”4 driving the

educational system of Britain to grow to include middle class children, and eventually to begin

reforming traditional ideas of who should be educated. The women that should not work, that is

being employed outside of the home, created new social groups and organizations within the

home. Railroads were being built allowing for news to spread more quickly across Britain and

for the first time people outside of the upper class were able to travel for leisure. Men and

women read, and literacy as well as the literature industry grew.

These changes in lifestyle helped to open the populace to changes in their belief systems

and religion blossomed. In 1733 Voltaire wrote “If one religion only were allowed in England,

the government would very possibly become arbitrary; if there were but two, the people would

cut one another’s throats but, as there is such a multitude, the all live happy, and in peace”5. The

4 Heyck 250
5 Arnstein 88

4
idea that Britain was better because of the middle class questioning social norms led to the

questioning of even more fundamental aspects of British Society. Philosophers began

questioning the established religious and scientific institutions. They struggled to bring what had

been conflicting ideologies into synchrony. This struggle led to a further fracturing of

protestants and to a great variety of philosophical theories. It also gave way for a rise in science

and reasoning that help to smooth the way for a move away from religion.

The emergence of the middle class had effects that were felt in every aspect of British

Society. It influenced the perspective of the aristocracy, it subverted the poor to an even lower

status, and it brought to the forefront of British consciousness a new set of values. Progress,

driven by competition, was to be valued as the epitome of success, hard work to be honorable,

and respectability to be a sign of social standing. The middle class was very influential and

drove public policy to reform. The balance of power was permanently shifted away from

nobility, and birth rights no longer dictated social standing. And although there was great

disparity in the middle class between the wealthiest and the poorest, they were still a new group

defined by their work ethic, values, and accomplishment.