How is Britain’s ‘National Revival’ in the years 1784-1792 best explained?

On the one hand, it may appear convenient to attribute Britain’s ‘national revival’ to the
mercantile nature of the country at the time, the beneficial aspect of relative peace during the
period, as well as the consequences of both the French Revolution and the beginning of the
Industrial Revolution. On the other hand, one would be perfectly entitled to argue that the
financial abilities of Pitt the Younger and the subsequent structural and Parliamentary reforms he
introduced were motivators, if not actuators, of the National Revival. Therefore, whilst the
National Revival can be explained through the circumstances and European attitudes of the time,
it can be best explained in the framework of Pitt’s efficiency as the leader of Great Britain during
this period.
Prior to commencing this analysis, it is essential to establish a definite understanding of the term,
‘National Revival.’ For the purpose of this essay, ‘National Revival’ will be defined as the
recovery of the British economy and global standing, as well as the shift in the nature of
Parliamentary procedure surrounding domestic issues, from 1784-1792.
Primarily, the economic revival can be explained by addressing the evolution in British trade and
mercantilism throughout the 1780s. With the worst of the American crisis over, British industries
which had previously been subject to the harsh protectionism by the government were now able
to move to freer markets to boost their commercial successes, especially from 1786 following the
Anglo-French Treaty, which encouraged interdependence between British and French markets.
Britain’s sizable merchant fleets, as well as the extent of its empire, were instrumental to the
nurture of overseas trade, as well as the increase of highly profitable exports of cotton, woolens
and iron to the British trading platform. This is demonstrated by the exponential increase in
annual imports and exports in the 1780s and early 1790s. The surge in economic prosperity
during the National Revival can be attributed by the mobile and adaptable nature of British trade
in the later 18th Century.
Conversely, the economic growth which characterised the National Revival can also be
attributed to William Pitt’s astuteness as a financier. Pitt’s various financial initiatives included
the 1786 Sinking Fund, which had played a large role in decreasing national debt by £73 million
by 1792. This was essential in relieving the private capital market from the great slump that it
had endured throughout the late 1770s to early 1780s, especially considering that by the end of
1784, it was considered nearly impossible for an individual to borrow money on any security as a
result of the exceedingly high interest rates, propagated by Britain’s war debts crowding out
private debt and reducing domestic investment spending.
Moreover, Pitt’s organisation of customs duties and the introduction of the Commutation Act in
1784 effectively caused the proportion of smuggled goods to taxed goods to dwindle, which was
extremely beneficial to the health and rigidity of the British trading structure; additionally, Pitt’s
gradual reduction of parliamentary sinecures was instrumental in reducing the distribution of
government salaries down to the offices which truly required active service. Pitt’s financial
reforms aided the stimulation of economic recovery and overseas trade to an extent, so it is
hardly justifiable not to credit him for his role in the National Revival.
Furthermore, it is essential to recognise that Pitt’s preservation of peace throughout the early to
mid-1780s was contributory to the rapidity and fluidity of Britain’s economic growth throughout
the period. Peace, in the sense that it involves the absence of direct conflict with other nations,
encourages capital and labour accumulation, and in this case it allowed Pitt to establish more key
trading links between Britain and other European powers, as demonstrated by Pitt’s signing of
the Eden Treaty in 1786 despite being in a state of cold conflict with France. Pitt’s eagerness to
stay at peace, and his subsequent attempts to stimulate interdependence within European trade,
allowed Britain to distance itself from economic protectionism in these years of relative peace,
which contributed to the economic recovery during National Revival. In this case, the financial
segment of the National Revival can be best explained through Pitt the Younger’s financial and
diplomatic abilities as Prime Minister during this period.
Having explored the economic aspects of the National Revival, it is essential to explore how
Britain’s rise to a more respectable global image can be best explained. One extremely important
factor in the reaffirmation of Britain’s status as a strong colonial power was its military
expenditure, specifically its naval expenditure, from 1784 to 1792. Having lost the Thirteen
Colonies and suffered a humiliating defeat at the hands of the Americans, it was a number one
priority to ensure that Britain would not be reduced to a weak island nation barely hanging onto
its colonial territories. Pitt’s recognition that a strong Navy was imperative to Britain’s position
as a global power, and his subsequent decision to spend upwards of £60 million on naval
improvements from his election in 1783 to the beginning of wars with France in 1792, is what
allowed Britain to be once again revered as a great military power at the height of its prime by
the end of the National Revival.
Additionally, Britain’s global standing during the National Revival was increasingly affected by
Pitt’s determination to improve diplomatic relations with other relations, most notably by
proving that France and Britain could peacefully negotiate mutually beneficial trade deals.
Furthermore, Pitt’s entering of the Triple Alliance with Prussia and the United Provinces in 1788
was crucial towards shifting Britain away from isolationism and strengthening its bonds with
pre-existing allies, as well as preventing French obstructionism in the Netherlands, contributing
to the growth of British trade. Again, Pitt’s diplomatic abilities, as well as those of William Eden
and Gérard de Rayneval, seem to be a very compelling framework for explaining the origins of
the National Revival. However, it has also been suggested that the diplomatic atmosphere
surrounding the National Revival cannot and should not be attributed only to Pitt and certain
other foreign representatives, since most of the European powers during the period of relative
peace were adamantly opposed to engaging in any more conflict, especially if it would not be
beneficial to them in the long run. Obviously, this general environment of maintaining
diplomatic relations on peaceful terms was eventually broken down following the collapse of the
Ancien Régime and the consequent warring period, but it should be noted that European powers,
most prominently the Holy Roman Empire, became increasingly determined to strengthen
relations with Britain following the French Revolution, which had concentrated the fear that anti-
monarchist revolution could become exportable. Diplomatic attitudes in Europe at the time,
accelerated by the events of the French Revolution, were instrumental in increasing international
dependence upon Britain, and therefore cannot be overlooked when considering the National
Revival’s best explanation in relation to British global affairs.
It can also be argued that Pitt’s actions concerning Parliamentary involvement in the colonies of
the Indian subcontinent were beneficial both to Britain’s economy, and to Britain’s status as a
rigid colonial power. Pitt’s India Act of 1784 and the subsequent increase in British oversight of
Indian trading activities, especially towards the East India Company, was advantageous in
ensuring that governmental practice abroad was sanitised in order to prevent individual
socioeconomic advancement of the government elite. At a time when it was not considered
Parliament’s remit to directly involve itself in the mechanisms of economic function, Pitt
demonstrated that it was well within the powers granted to the government to impose restrictions
and supervision on even the most powerful independent trading company in the world at the
time. Pitt’s engineering of administrative reform concerning overseas colonies offers one
explanation as to how Britain’s power, both domestically and internationally, was reaffirmed
during the National Revival.
Conclusively, it is essential to recognise that Britain was a beneficiary of diplomatic and
economic circumstance when it came to the foundations of the National Revival, and so they
must be widely considered as having been, figuratively, the first step on the staircase to British
recovery of economic wellbeing and international status from 1784-92. However, it is even more
important to appreciate the efforts of Pitt the Younger when it came to pulling Britain out of its
recession and laying the groundwork for it to fully redevelop into a prominent colonialist trading
nation at the height of its military performance, which can be constituted as having actively
encouraged the National Revival and adequately prepared Britain for the challenges it would
face with the arrival of the French Revolutionary Wars from 1792 onwards.