272 Agricultural Revolutions and Change
expectations. Where I imagined 2 or 3 trials would have proved decisive, 40 have
been conducted in vain’ (Young, 1770). Bakewell’s approach to experiment was
openminded: ‘I would recommend to you and others who have done me the credit
of adopting my opinions to pursue it with unremitting zeal as far as shall be con-
sistent with prudence and common sense, always open to conviction when any-
thing better is advanced’ (Bakewell, 1787, in Pawson, 1957). And Culley, in a
letter in 1801, wrote ‘I often say that we have a deal to learn yet. And every wise
humble man will learn every year and every day’ (MacDonald, 1977).
And yet these considered comments of farmers seem to have been very largely
forgotten since the end of the agricultural revolution. They conflict with the pre-
dominant view of the agricultural experiment, namely that it is the domain of
scientists and takes place solely on the research station or in the university. Ortho-
doxy holds that scientific agriculture began with the establishment of the RASE in
1838 and Rothamsted Experimental Station in 1843. These have brought immense
benefits to agriculture, but have also served to hide the experimental practices of
farmers. The result is now a deeply held belief that the first scientific experiments
occurred only after the 1840s. A recent history of agricultural science in Britain
begins at 1840 (Rossiter, 1975); and two earlier books by E. John Russell, a former
director at Rothamsted, suggest that the ‘first experiments’ began in earnest at
Rothamsted, before which any experiments were conducted by academics working
alone. In neither of his books is the role of farmers mentioned (Russell, 1946,
1966).
Experiments to improve soil fertility
Experiments to improve and sustain soil fertility promised quick returns for rela-
tively little investment, and farmers made use of both internal and external
resources (Table 12.2). Some had been common for centuries – livestock manures,
marling, leaf mould and lime certainly had long been crucial in maintaining soil
fertility and physical structure (Pretty, 1990c). Some experiments were designed to
test various treatments over time on the same field. Having grown nitrogen-fixing
tares (vetch) before wheat and producing ‘excellent crops’ as a result, the Rev.
Moseley of Drinkston felt that something further could be done in the three
months between the vetch harvest and wheat sowing in order ‘not only to keep the
land clean, but to improve the succeeding crop’ (Moseley, in Young, 1813a). He
planted buckwheat (Fagopyrum esculentum) and ploughed it in as a green manure.
The wheat benefitted, but as it was attacked by rodents on the threshing floor, he
conducted the experiment again the following year. This time he harvested 3.3
tonnes from 2.4 hectares, a ‘much larger crop than I expected’. Young commented
that ‘many have sown tares; and many have ploughed in buckwheat; and most
have given a year to each; but it is the combination of the two that forms the merit
... Mr Moseley in this husbandry is original’ (Young, 1813a).
Other experiments were designed to compare the relative value of different
treatments on the same field. In 1818, Arthur Biddell, a tenant farmer at Playford