Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue

Article Menu

Share Help Cite Discuss in SciProfiles

Open AccessArticle

Peer-Review Record

Climate in 14th-Century England: Catastrophic Change, Social Strategies and the Origins of Capitalism

Soc. Sci. 2024, 13(9), 477; https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci13090477

by Daniel Ribera Vainfas

Reviewer 1: Anonymous

Reviewer 2: Anonymous

Soc. Sci. 2024, 13(9), 477; https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci13090477

Submission received: 30 June 2024 / Revised: 31 August 2024 / Accepted: 5 September 2024 / Published: 9 September 2024

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Disasters, Social Movements, Policy Responses and Sociocultural Evolution)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This essay mixes contemporary climate change studies into the mid-twentieth century concern in Marxist historiography with the passage from medieval to modern economic systems. It argues that some mid-1900s Marxist analyses of the collapse of feudal structures are compatible with the current conviction that Europe underwent a shift to colder and damper weather patterns in the 1300s. As always in environmental history the issue is whether correlation (new climate, new socio-economic systems) is causation. Though the essay sets out asserting it will not promote an enviro-deterministic view, in the conclusion the essay embraces the idea that the shift to capitalist modes of production happened because Europe's climate became colder/wetter.

The writer(s) should evaluate carefully the intended audience for this essay. Few contemporary professional medievalists or environmental historians in the Anglosphere are as familiar with Marxist debates of the 20th c as sometimes the essay assumes they are. More detail on the debates of the mid-1900s and better explication of why they are still relevant is needed to make a less specialist readership care about the issues presented.

The organization of the essay might be tweaked (see the detailed suggestions below). The portion on p needlessly repeats material that had been presented on p. Much of this discussion would be helpful to readers at the beginning of the essay, to orient them in the how writer(s) see 14th c climate change studies at the same time as readers learn about Marxist historiography grappling with the end of the Middle Ages and beginning of modern times.

Further, it may be wise to limit the essay's focus to England, since the 1900s debates that are presented mostly focus on that case study and since this essay ends up doing the same thing. In addition, the Marxist debates at the center of the discussion were in English and mostly about England, and hence most interested readers will be Anglophone and England-centered. Limiting the ambit to England would spare the essay from superficial forays into a "Europe" that is very ecologically various, and hence experiences atmospheric change in very various forms.

The bibliography is limited and hence tendentious. Medieval palaeoclimate and palaeoepedemiology studies are far more various and sophisticated that the essay allows: Campbell's is only one voice, and is contested. Lutterbacher too has many critics. Also the Marxist debate is far larger than the collections of Hilton and. The Utrecht late medievalists are Marxist in orientation and have written extensively about the development of modern economic systems in the North Sea region, without being at all limited by the Brenner debate etc.

Here are some observations keyed to page and line of the ms:

p. 1= Misleading to date the Dobb-Sweezy debate 2004, because it is consulted in a Portuguese translation, not in the original 1950s Science and Society articles. Confusing that the more famous Brenner debate of the 1970s comes afterwards, though it too is consulted in a 1990s recap volume, not in the original exchanges of the 1970s and 80s. Make the chronologies of these interventions clearer to contemporary readers, very few of whom have the names Hilton and Brenner on the tip of their tongues.

P 1 line 43= longer than human life

P 1 line 45= triggering triggers is awful, but the whole sentence 44-46 is convoluted and needlessly wordy, and should be rewritten.

P 2 l 50= high average temperatures

P 2 l 55= change in average temperatures

P 2 l 58= A huge generalization. Europe is a big heterogenous place. More rain, or higher temperatures have very different effects in different parts of the continent.

P 2 l 65-6 using currently available tools.

P 2 67-8 as a promising explanation for

P 2 l 68 the thesis that

P 2 l 72 far from established: the “New Environmental Fall of Rome” has been and continues to be roundly criticized. Cite Sessa’s 2019 article at least.

P 2 l 72 What we must investigate is

P 2 l 75 Here it is necessary to make a caveat: climate is non-deterministic in nature.

P 2 l 79 finally it becomes clear that we are actually only talking about a small corner of Europe: this should be stated at the outset.

P 2 l 80-1 not a sufficient one. Climate is a conditioning element…

p 2 l 82 Given all this,

p 2 l 85-90 far too long and winding a sentence. For clarity break it down into 3 separate sentences. This is the thesis statement after all, and to be clear is crucial.

P 2 l 91-4 Very odd to pose the question right after having given the answer.

P 2 l 95 This essay thus reinterprets the Marxist debate

P 2 l 96 transformations. In the 14^th century these catalyzed

P 2 l 96 social conditions. This is analogous to what Sweeney proposed would have been the effect of foreign trade, but also supports the superexploitation of the peasantry

P 3 l 104-5 Class struggle was for Brenner the guiding principle

P 3 l 108 with a surplus extraction impossible

P 3 l 113 deepen understanding is an anemic goal and wishy washy, hard to pin down.

P 3 l 118-23 the end of feudalism in Mediterranean Europe came sooner than in England, precisely because of the presence of urban markets and trade. Sweeney was less immersed in the English manor rolls than his interlocutors.

P3 l 129-37 still more preliminaries? Readers’ patience is not infinite. This paragraph might fit better on p 1 to sort out the chronologies of the Marxist discussions.

P 3 l 138-55 these paragraphs repeat material from p 2, needlessly.

P 3 l 152 all European agriculture? The same in Sweden and Andalusia?

P 4 l 173 Campbell is an authority, but there are plenty of others. Phil Slavin argues that plague struck urban populations hardest, regardless of class. Benedictow thinks that rich people (who had the stores of grain rats lived by) were more prone than poor people to a disease transmitted (he thinks) by rats and their fleas. The “resilience theorists” need to be included here too. Very relevant is D. Curtis, esp. his Coping with Crisis, who shows how adjacent English manors had very different trajectories 1290-1400 because of their social set up, regardless of climate/plague/other terrible catastrophes.

P 4 l 179 abbots died because they lived in communities, which post covid we know are “transmission pools.” Abbots in any case were in many ways social superiors to bishops.

P 4 l 188 a shorter growing season is perfect for a smaller work force. The cherry picking of negative data, without considering that environmental change also creates conditions favorable to some species and individuals, lessens the plausibility of the argument.

P 4 l 199 what about the well-worn argument for post 1348 that when there is less labor available landlords focus on the best land, so productivity rises?

P 4 l 202 where exactly does Pirenne propose this “thesis”? “the Pirenne thesis” is about north Europe emancipating itself from Mediterranean economic patterns (in the 7-8^th centuries!).

P 5 l 205-21 This section does not add to the argument and is dispensable. It makes superficial parallels between 6^th and 14^th c conditions that have long been questioned by specialists: see the work of Tim Newfield (eg in Studies in Late Antiquity 2022), or Lee Mordechai.

P 5 l 227 not only in the demographic growth observed across Europe, but also in the process

P5 l 228 and unproductive. Both processes have their roots in

P 5 l 230-1 worth telling readers why it’s axiomatic that higher levels of production entail changed social relations. Here it’s assumed to be true, not demonstrated.

P 5 l 236 for Pirenne the “axis” shifted in Carolingian times…

P 6 261 Bois’s argument can be a useful foil to Brenner’s.

P 6 l 269 a plural is missing? either incomes or decreases

p. 6 l 261-77 It sometimes sounds like Bois himself introduced climate change as a variable, but it surely is a mistaken impression in these early debates. Clarify. This section is unnecessarily wrong, since what is being conveyed is simple (Bois thought feudalism collapsed because it produced declining income).

P 6 l 304 this out of synch-ness is the crux for the Marxist analysis, since it suggests that social relations/oppression are not the whole story. It deserves more emphasis.

P 6 l 306 some explanation for this sudden explicit turn to England is needed. It may be best to simply say at the beginning of the essay that the focus throughout is England.

P 6 l 307 Internally? Why internally? Internal to what?

P6 l 310 complexification is an unfortunate coinage. “growing complexity” is better, but really we are talking about stratification.

P 7 l 335 where do abandoned lands come from during the bubbly 12-13^th c?

P 7 l 340 can only become a reality? Says who? Where is this Table of the Law?

P 7 l 363-4 in the long term. England’s insertion into European trade circuits allowed the specialization

P 7 l 365 surely east England was specializing in sheep before the 1300s.

P 8 l explain fully how this “realization of economic objectives” worked through the wool-for-grain trade. Why would the two classes identified be the disproportionate beneficiaries?

P 8 l 389 a one-sided account, undermined by studies of medieval enclosure like C. Dyer, in Landscape History 2012 showing uncertain class structure in English enclosures of the 1200s-1300s.

P 8 l 399 the discussion here relies wholly on Williamson. It would be enriched by consideration of different perspectives. The “resilience” of common rights is the subject of many studies, eg van Weeren+De Moor in Agricultural History Review 2014.

P8 l 419 why is Galloway all caps: that important? Actually the chronology in (eg) Soens’s study of coastal wetlands turned to pasture is quite different (Rural Societies and Environments at Risk, 2013).

P 9 l 422 actually the “substitution” is partial and time bound: in Romney Marsh the shepherds used the wetlands in winter, and retreated in summer, leaving the pastures to the cultivators.

P9 l 423-4 I do not understand this phrase, and fear other readers won’t either.

P 9 l 427 How does this square with the earlier claim that the yeomen and the minor nobles were the architects of the transition to capitalist exploitation?

P 9 l 432 why not cite the studies of the Utrecht school of Marxist historians who treat this topic so well (van Bavel, Soens, Thoen)? They are certainly more current than Wood (in CAPS).

P 9 l 454-5 this sudden appearance of a “North Sea basin” and of ecological differences in a Europe (here even in an England) that hitherto has been presented as environmentally homogenous is unfortunate. Better to start out with a focus on England, and allow eco-difference from the outset.

P 9 l 461 in this paper, the theses

P 9 l 466 (2004b) introduced this consideration by identifying trade as the disruptive factor. In light of recent studies of climate history, 14^th century climatic change looks likelier to have triggered the transition

P9 l 472 medieval economic growth

P 10 l 475 also encouraged the dissemination of pathogens that proved devastating for European populations… (Note that this claim is not supported in the article, and is highly contested among specialists).

P 10 l 487 explain what is meant by “social reconfiguration.”

P 10 l 491 what climate collapse? no mention of it has been made previously, where climate change was discussed.

P 10 l 492 these groups were not introduced at the beginning, but well into the middle section of this essay.

P 10 l 502-6 unclear what difference it makes whether the nobility in question has “political coercion capacity” or not, nor how this relates to their “reduced extra-economic coercion mechanisms”.

P 10 l 511-4 an exceptionally turgid and unclear sentence with wobbly syntax too.

P 10 l 515-8 contradicts the claims in the introduction to eschew environmental determinism and forgets the effort to see climate (or in the latter half of this essay also plague) as one among several “causes” of change.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The English is serviceable, not literary but comprehensible.

Author Response

Reviewer 1:

First of all, I’d like to thank the reviewer for the in-depth feedback, the reference to Saisse (2019) was particularly useful for this paper.

Regarding the enviro-deterministic criticism, I took extra steps in order to make it clearer that the paper does not dismiss human agency in the face of climate change, the suggested references about the “new environmental fall of Rome” were very useful in this regard. I’ve also softened the tone regarding the changes themselves as the semantic weight in a lot of those were changed during translation. The specific changes have been addressed in the point-by-point summary below.

I’ve also done extensive changes in the introduction both to justify the relevance of the Marxist transition debate and to better situate the scope in the climate change in England. Nearly every reference to “Europe” has been revised in order to narrow down the geography.

The bibliography has been considerably extended (a list of new works included in the revision is provided below). Unfortunately, I have not been able to access every work suggested, but I believe I did manage to bridge the gaps pointed out in the first review with different works.

Lines added:

18-28

34-42 – paragraphs were shifted up in the text

56-67

78-79

86-92

117-120

131-149

244-250

374-378

403-424

467-496

500-502

543-556

568-588

New references:

Allen, R. C. Enclosure and the Yeoman: The Agricultural Development of the South Midlands 1450-1850; Oxford University Press: [S.l.], 1992.

Bailey, M. The Decline of Serfdom in Late Medieval England: From Bondage to Freedom; Boydell & Brewer Ltd: [S.l.], 2014.

Bankoff, G. The “English Lowlands” and the North Sea Basin System: A History of Shared Risk. Environ. Hist. 2013, 19 (1), 3–37.

Broadberry, S. N.; et al. British Economic Growth, 1270-1870; Cambridge University Press: New York, 2015.

Dyer, C. Villages in Crisis: Social Dislocation and Desertion, 1370–1520. In Deserted Villages Revisited; Dyer, C.; Jones, R., Eds.; University of Hertfordshire Press: Hatfield, 2010; pp 28–45.

Ganshof, F.-L.; Verhulst, A. Medieval Agrarian Society in Its Prime, France, the Low Countries and Western Germany. In The Cambridge Economic History of Europe from the Decline of the Roman Empire: Volume 1, Agrarian Life of the Middle Ages; Postan, M. M., Ed.; Cambridge University Press: [S.l.], 2008; 2nd ed.; pp 290–339.

Haldon, J.; Rosen, A. Society and Environment in the East Mediterranean ca 300–1800 CE. Problems of Resilience, Adaptation and Transformation. Introductory Essay. Hum. Ecol. 2018, 46, 275–290.

Hoffmann, R. An Environmental History of Medieval Europe; Cambridge University Press: [S.l.], 2014.

Jones, R. Contrasting Patterns of Village and Hamlet Desertion in England. In Deserted Villages Revisited; Dyer, C.; Jones, R., Eds.; University of Hertfordshire Press: Hatfield, 2010; pp 8–27.

Mauquoy, D.; et al. Two Decadally Resolved Records from North-West European Peat Bogs Show Rapid Climate Changes Associated with Solar Variability During the Mid–Late Holocene. J. Quat. Sci. 2008, 23 (8), 745–763.

Mordechai, L.; Eisenberg, M. Rejecting Catastrophe: The Case of the Justinianic Plague. Past & Present 2019, 244 (1), 3–50.

Pirenne, H. Mohammed and Charlemagne

Postan, M. M. Medieval Agrarian Society in Its Prime, England. In The Cambridge Economic History of Europe from the Decline of the Roman Empire: Volume 1, Agrarian Life of the Middle Ages; Postan, M. M., Ed.; Cambridge University Press: [S.l.], 2008; 2nd ed.; pp 549–632.

Postan, M. Some Economic Evidence of Declining Population in the Later Middle Ages. Econ. Hist. Rev. 1950, 2 (3), 221–246.

Prybil, K. Farming, Famine and Plague. The Impact of Climate; [S.l.], 2017.

Rotherham, I. D. Lost Fens: England’s Greatest Ecological Disaster; The History Press: [S.l.], 2013.

Sessa, K. The New Environmental Fall of Rome: A Methodological Consideration. J. Late Antiquity 2019, 12 (1), 211–255.

Smith, S. Houses and Communities: Archaeological Evidence for Variation in Medieval Peasant Experience. In Deserted Villages Revisited; Dyer, C.; Jones, R., Eds.; University of Hertfordshire Press: Hatfield, 2010; pp 64–84.

Soens, T. The Social Distribution of Land and Flood Risk along the North Sea Coast: Flanders, Holland and Romney Marsh Compared (c. 1200-1750). In Rural Societies and Environments at Risk: Ecology, Property Rights and Social Organisation in Fragile Areas (Middle Ages-Twentieth Century); Turnhout: [S.l.], 2013; pp 141–173.

Trouet, V.; et al. Persistent Positive North Atlantic Oscillation Mode Dominated the Medieval Climate Anomaly. Science 2009, 324 (5923), 78–80.

Point-by-point review:

P 2 l 79 finally it becomes clear that we are actually only talking about a small corner of Europe: this should be stated at the outset.
- Added the information on the first paragraph l.14
P 2 l 91-4 Very odd to pose the question right after having given the answer.
- Odd indeed! Moved the question up and rephrased it l.163
P 3 l 113 deepen understanding is an anemic goal and wishy washy, hard to pin down.
- Removed said passage.
P 3 l 118-23 the end of feudalism in Mediterranean Europe came sooner than in England, precisely because of the presence of urban markets and trade. Sweeney was less immersed in the English manor rolls than his interlocutors.
- I believe this is a longer debate than the scope of this exchange, but the urban markets and trade in the Mediterranean reinforces the feudal structure around it, there is something different in the changes in England, in the sense they create a new mode of accumulation which erode the feudal economy around them, it’s Brenner’s “within the shell of feudalism” approach.
P3 l 129-37 still more preliminaries? Readers’ patience is not infinite. This paragraph might fit better on p 1 to sort out the chronologies of the Marxist discussions.
- Agreed, moved it up and rephrased a little, it’s now the third paragraph in the introduction
P 3 l 138-55 these paragraphs repeat material from p 2, needlessly.
- My mistake, I had shifted those paragraphs up but forgot to delete them on page 3. Now I’ve removed them.
P 4 l 179 abbots died because they lived in communities, which post covid we know are “transmission pools.” Abbots in any case were in many ways social superiors to bishops.
- This seems to contradict Campbell’s position regarding ecclesiastical hierarchy. Could you provide a reference for the claim of abbots ascendancy over bishops?
P 4 l 188 a shorter growing season is perfect for a smaller work force. The cherry picking of negative data, without considering that environmental change also creates conditions favorable to some species and individuals, lessens the plausibility of the argument. / P 4 l 199 what about the well-worn argument for post 1348 that when there is less labor available landlords focus on the best land, so productivity rises?
- I conflated those observations because I expanded the text further to advance the proper argument. Parker’s citation here was meant to be an illustration of how climate can be bad for agriculture, e.g., the shorter growing season reduces the yield by giving the plant less time to mature. (here, specially l. 245 and on)
P 4 l 202 where exactly does Pirenne propose this “thesis”? “the Pirenne thesis” is about north Europe emancipating itself from Mediterranean economic patterns (in the 7-8th centuries!).
- Regarding the Arab conquest as the cause for the collapse of European trade in the Mediterranean, it is in “Mohammed and Charlemagne”, p.166 (1954 edition). The paragraph’s point was to soften the relevance of war as the cause of the economic decoupling and introduce climate change as a possible explanation. I rephrased it in order to make it clearer. L.257-263
P 5 l 205-21 This section does not add to the argument and is dispensable. It makes superficial parallels between 6th and 14th c conditions that have long been questioned by specialists: see the work of Tim Newfield (eg in Studies in Late Antiquity 2022), or Lee Mordechai.
- Those parallels, even though superficial, illustrate that what is happening in the 14th century is not an entirely new phenomenon and help dilute claims of a “climate determinism” on the paper thesis, as a preview reviewer of this work pointed out. I believe the work must contain at least a cursory comment on these other moments, although I am of course open to removing the passages if you think they cause more harm than good.
P 5 l 230-1 worth telling readers why it’s axiomatic that higher levels of production entail changed social relations. Here it’s assumed to be true, not demonstrated.
- Could you elaborate further? In the paragraph in question I pointed out that those changes did not happen. Do you want me to explain the marxist thesis of changes in the infrastructure?
- The paragraph for reference: “Despite the importance of hydraulic mills and crop rotation, it is the stability of atmospheric patterns and the rise in average temperatures that propel the productive forces to a higher level without significant changes in the social relations of production.” L.288-291
P 5 l 236 for Pirenne the “axis” shifted in Carolingian times…
- I believe we are talking about different axis here, in the paragraph in question I meant the international trade’s axis, not the whole economic axis. I rephrased the paragraph to clarify that. L.295
6 l 261-77 It sometimes sounds like Bois himself introduced climate change as a variable, but it surely is a mistaken impression in these early debates. Clarify.
- I rephrased the text in parentheses to clarify l.335
6 l 261-77 This section is unnecessarily wrong, since what is being conveyed is simple (Bois thought feudalism collapsed because it produced declining income).
- Did you mean “long” instead of “wrong”? If so, I respectfully disagree, the Bois section is three paragraphs long and is relevant as it introduces the “internal engine of feudalism” problem. If you did mean wrong, could you clarify?
P 6 l 306 some explanation for this sudden explicit turn to England is needed. It may be best to simply say at the beginning of the essay that the focus throughout is England.
- I did add some more clarification in the introduction regarding that.
P 6 l 307 Internally? Why internally? Internal to what?
- This was an artifact of a previous version, properly removed now. I also added some paragraphs
P 7 l 335 where do abandoned lands come from during the bubbly 12-13th c?
- It is mostly from deforestation, but I couldn’t find this reference to the growth in the 12-13th century in this section. In this paragraph I’m talking about the abandoned lands after the Black Death. Did you mean to point out a different line in the text?
P 7 l 340 can only become a reality? Says who? Where is this Table of the Law?
- No new commandment here! It was a translation problem. I’ve rewritten the sentence to:: “This expansion of income is realized by the mediation of a foreign merchant class also possessing a convergent agenda: the merchants of the Hanseatic League.” I believe it is clearer now. L.434-436
P 7 l 365 surely east England was specializing in sheep before the 1300s.
- I believe this is more debatable, but even so, no to the extension that it did during the 14-15th century
P 8 l 389 a one-sided account, undermined by studies of medieval enclosure like C. Dyer, in Landscape History 2012 showing uncertain class structure in English enclosures of the 1200s-1300s.
- The enclosure section has been substantively expanded incorporating Dyer, Allen and and Postan
P 8 l 399 the discussion here relies wholly on Williamson. It would be enriched by consideration of different perspectives. The “resilience” of common rights is the subject of many studies, eg van Weeren+De Moor in Agricultural History Review
- See above
P8 l 419 why is Galloway all caps: that important? Actually the chronology in (eg) Soens’s study of coastal wetlands turned to pasture is quite different (Rural Societies and Environments at Risk, 2013).
- Capitalized names were a formatting mistake (it was the Brazilian style guideline), all capitalized names have been corrected in the second version of the paper. Galloway has been joined by Rotterham and Soen in this revised version.
P 9 l 422 actually the “substitution” is partial and time bound: in Romney Marsh the shepherds used the wetlands in winter, and retreated in summer, leaving the pastures to the cultivators.
- Agreed, I have since expanded the section in order to better reflect these nuances
P9 l 423-4 I do not understand this phrase, and fear other readers won’t either.
- I believe the original sentence was: “The relative impact of climate change on grain production is substantially greater than the impact on sheep farming, which allows for specialization for the market while making it impossible to maintain the medieval economy in its previous form.”
- I have rewritten the sentence in order to clarify it: “The relative impact of climate change on grain production is substantially greater than the impact on sheep husbandry, this creates an ecological incentive towards the latter. However, people still need grain to eat and start to procure a greater quantity of it from the market, using the profits from the wool trade to finance this increased demand for wheat. As a consequence, this society increases its reliance on wheat markets to provide their food, thus altering the basis of the medieval economy.” l.584-589
P 9 l 427 How does this square with the earlier claim that the yeomen and the minor nobles were the architects of the transition to capitalist exploitation?
- I don’t see the contradiction here. The relevant earlier claim is “a class fraction of the nobility that lives off the appropriation of peasant labor but does not have feudal mechanisms of extra-economic coercion to extract said labor.” This is the idea the follows through this sentence and is restated in “The enclosures, especially in the context of the 15th century, appear much more as a necessity for the local landowner, embedded in the minor nobility we saw in the previous section” a couple paragraphs later.
- If you think there is still an unanswered tension, could you please elaborate?
P 9 l 432 why not cite the studies of the Utrecht school of Marxist historians who treat this topic so well (van Bavel, Soens, Thoen)? They are certainly more current than Wood (in CAPS).
- Most of those works were not accessible here, although I did manage to include Soen
P 9 l 454-5 this sudden appearance of a “North Sea basin” and of ecological differences in a Europe (here even in an England) that hitherto has been presented as environmentally homogenous is unfortunate. Better to start out with a focus on England, and allow eco-difference from the outset.
- I have expanded the first section of the paper in order to emphasize the eco-difference you have pointed out throughout this review. The North Sea Basin is situated along the following generalization line: England’s east coast -> North Sea Basin -> Western Europe
P 10 l 475 also encouraged the dissemination of pathogens that proved devastating for European populations… (Note that this claim is not supported in the article, and is highly contested among specialists).
- As pointed out, the original discussion of the relationship between pathogen dissemination and climate change was not properly stated in the paper. I have opted to remove the sentence in order to keep its focus clear.
P 10 l 487 explain what is meant by “social reconfiguration.”
- I have expanded the paragraph in order to attend the request. L.649 and on
P 10 l 491 what climate collapse? no mention of it has been made previously, where climate change was discussed.
- I have replaced “collapse” with “change” to keep the conceptual coherence as pointed out. L.654
P 10 l 511-4 an exceptionally turgid and unclear sentence with wobbly syntax too.
- The sentence has been rewritten for clarity l.672-676
P 10 l 515-8 contradicts the claims in the introduction to eschew environmental determinism and forgets the effort to see climate (or in the latter half of this essay also plague) as one among several “causes” of change.
- Rewritten to resolve the contradiction l.684-686

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

· This paper aims to introduce climate change into the discourse on the factors that drove economic change in medieval England. The authors propose to do this with a Marxist framework.

o This is the biggest issue with the paper. More needs to be done to explain to the reader why it is important to integrate climate into the Marxist framework. Essentially the question is: why Marxism?

o There are other frameworks that exist alongside Marxism that also attempt to explain the development of the medieval English economy. There is also a population:resources (Malthusian) framework and a commercialization framework. One might argue that climate does not feature prominently in any of these ‘supermodels’ but has rather existed on its own it a sort of ‘environmentally determinist’ framework. So, there is a clear imperative to make climate an important factor in the historical narrative, and this is what Campbell 2016 does.

o Perhaps the way to motivate this is that the Marxist paradigm is the only one that explicitly involves a shift from ‘feudalism’ to ‘capitalism’. If that is the tack the authors want to take, then this could be made more explicit?

o What is the connection between the climate change of the 14th century and the process of structural transformation known as the transition from feudalism to capitalism?

o Should climate be integrated into a Marxist framework?

o Or are they two different schema

· The fundamental idea for this paper is very good. The problem is that it barely scratches the surface in terms of all the related literature.

· The author seems to use a lord:serf binary, which probably comes from the Marxist literature. Of course, there were many different kinds of non-lord tenants, and not all of them were servile. This is a nuance that should be acknowledged. Line 307 discusses ‘nobles and non-nobles’; how do these terms fit in with ‘lords and serfs’?

· The paper only scratches the surface in terms of the rich economic history literature that could and should be cited in this paper. Some examples can be found below, but it is certainly not an exhaustive list. I would urge the authors to delve a bit more deeply into the medieval English economic history literature.

· Bob Allen on enclosure (Enclosure and the Yeoman)

· Mark Bailey ‘decline of serfdom’ (book and articles)

· Kathleen Pribyl on medieval English climate

· Chris Wickham on Marxism as an explanatory paradigm for medieval history (The Economic Logic of Medieval Societies)

· Bruce Campbell ‘nature as historical protagonist’ (article which is precursor to his 2016 book) and ‘English Seigniorial Agriculture’

· Mark Overton on The Agricultural Revolution in England

· Jordan Claridge and Spike Gibbs “Waifs and Strays: Property Rights in Late Medieval England” (A case study which adds empirical evidence to debates about the lord:tenant dynamic”

Detailed points

· The author identifies these debates that occurred between the 1950s and 1970s. They suggest there were two 1) Dobb-Sweezy and 2) the Brenner debate. However, the citations for Dobb-Sweezy are from 2004? It might make more sense to cite the original publications here, from the 1950s-70s?

· Why the very short paragraphs?

· Lines 414-424 – here the author discusses one work in terms of the shift from ‘people to sheep’; this is but one example of the broad shift from arable agriculture to pastoral agriculture, which involves not only sheep, but cattle as well. I think the article needs to address this broader shift rather than a specific example.

· Line 266 – the text susggest there should be a quote here, but there are no quotation marks or obvious citation?

· Line 283 – same issue with demarking direct quotations.

Author Response

First of all, I’d like to thank the reviewer for the Pribyl (2017) reference suggestion, it was a very valuable new source for this work.

I have significantly expanded the introduction section, adding a justification for the Marxist transition debate choice. In a nutshell, I believe the debate helps to avoid some common pitfalls in environmental history, by delineating specific process through which a change in climate can become a social change.

The lord-serf binary indeed comes from the Marxist literature, I did use nobles vs. non-nobles to broaden the debate because as Bailey (2014) points out, the distinction between a villain and a tenant was more nuanced than earlier literature assumed. I believe I’ve dealt with this by incorporating other references in this paper and by expanding the relevant sections. See below a list of the new additions, both in terms of text and of references.