50 pages • 1 hour read
Thomas MalthusAn Essay on the Principle of Population
Nonfiction | Book | Adult | Published in 1798A modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.
Chapters 3-5Chapter Summaries & Analyses
Chapter 3 Summary
Chapter 3 is brief and observes the growth of population in hunting and shepherding communities. It postulates that the population in hunting societies (“the rudest state of mankind,” [12]) must necessarily be thin because their means of subsistence is scattered over a large extent of territory. Malthus believes that Native Americans (referred to as the “North American Indians” and the “savages” in the original text) are among some of the least sexually active people in the world (12). Further, he maintains that in spite of this lack of reproductive ardor, the rate of population growth still exceeds the society’s capacity to support it. In other words, the power of population growth exceeds people’s capacity to produce food even in hunting societies. With this truth established, Malthus is mainly interested in observing whether population growth can be kept in check without producing vice or misery.
The author offers to consider “The North American Indians” as a single group of people that are neither free nor equal. This is because all accounts of “savage nations” report that women in such communities are slaves to the men and are exploited worse than the poor in “civilized countries,” (12). Since the burden of population checks mostly fall upon the shoulders of the poor, the living conditions of women in these societies best reflect the conditions that keep population growth rates in check. Malthus believes that women in hunting societies are constantly displaced and cannot concentrate on child rearing. This frequent moving, in addition to the necessity of taking care of multiple children, can be overly taxing on their bodies, which can occasion miscarriages and increase infant mortality. Finally, frequent wars force women to also take care of elders while the men are gone. Malthus concludes that scarcity of food and unfavorable social conditions generate incredible misery and slow population growth.
In the second half of the chapter, Malthus turns to observe shepherding communities, the “next state of mankind” (13). He proposes that pasture land cannot support as many people as land that is tilled and cultivated. However, since shepherding communities (referred to as “Barbarians” in the original text [15]) raise animals, they always have an immediate food source at times of crisis, and therefore their women lived better than the women in hunting communities. The men, in turn, can provide for their children without having to worry about subsistence, and their population grew. As their numbers increased, the present herd could no longer sustain everyone, and the young adventurous ones would go out to seek new pastures. They ravage those in their path and fight to keep their share of land. Malthus believes these wars have exterminated entire tribes. Those who survived are battle-hardened and war loving. Citing historical figures, such as Alaric I, Attila, and Genghis (spelled as “Zingis” in the original text [15]) Khan, Malthus concludes the vice of war kept the population in shepherding communities balanced.
Without detailed information about the history of these people, Malthus admits he cannot pinpoint when their means of subsistence was scarce and how much it affected their population growth. Nevertheless, he maintains that the general principle remains the same: emigration and an abundance of food encourage population growth while wars and scarcity keep their numbers in check. Regardless of the condition of women in shepherding communities, the men’s love for warmongering is a definite vice which, alongside food scarcity, generates misery and acts as a check to growth on the lower stratum of their society.
Chapter 4 Summary
In chapter 4, Malthus looks at the next stage in human development, that of “civilized nations” that subsist on both pasture and tillage (17). Most European countries fall into this category, including France, England, Germany, Russia, Poland, Sweden, and Denmark. These countries have seen tremendous population growth over the years as a result of an increase in food production. Malthus insists it is inconceivable that so many people could survive on the same amount of food production as during the time of Julius Caesar. As an example, he observes that China’s population is large because it is considered “the most fertile country in the world” and almost all its land is used in tillage (18). Some parts of China have learned to produce two harvests in a season, yet people still find virtue in living frugally. Thus, the size of a population is directly correlated to its capacity to produce food.
Malthus disagrees with philosopher and economist David Hume (1711-1776), who theorized population growth indicators—such as high fertility, frequent early marriages, and a low rate of celibacy—proves ancient nations were already populous (see Essays xi by David Hume). Contrary to his friend, Malthus postulates that these indicators rather suggest an overabundance of resources, which means there is yet room to grow. The rate of celibacy and the frequency of early marriages in themselves do not provide enough information on the actual size of any population. To further defend this point, Malthus returns to the example of China. If economist Adam Smith (1723-1790) is correct in supposing that population growth in China is stationary because all its land has been tilled, yet early marriages are still the norm in all ranks of society, then it must be that certain vices or misery that keep population in check have been kept from Europeans. Occasional famines and the secret practice of infanticide may be such factors that stunt growth.
In modern Europe, population has grown considerably since tilling has become the main mode of food production. However, this growth rate has largely stagnated in recent years, especially compared to the United States. Malthus insists this is not because of a “decay of the passion between the sexes” (19) but because preventive checks happen through all strata of society, especially in England. A gentleman with a liberal education but a very small income will lower his status to that of moderate farmers or tradesmen if he has to further impoverish himself to provide for a family. This threat deters him from marrying early. Tradesmen and farmers are similarly persuaded out of early attachments, at least until they own a business or a piece of land. Workers who earn their money through hard labor cherish their independence and do not wish to divide their income among four or five. Finally, servants who work for gentlemen are provided with the necessities and comforts of life that workers do not enjoy. Since they have no other skill or alternate sources of income, they prefer to remain single in the current comfort of their employment. In sum, the preventive check to population in England operates not just among the lower classes but through all strata of society, preventing the society from growing overpopulated.
Chapter 5 Summary
Chapter 5 examines situations that act as a positive check to population growth. Malthus defines these factors as forces that repress “an increase which is already begun,” and act principally on the “lowest orders of society” (23). For example, infant mortality is higher among the poor, who cannot financially afford to take care of their children. In the cities, hard labor and cramped living conditions can cause their early death while in the countryside hard labor and a want of proper nourishment may stunt their growth. Together with the preventive checks to population explored in the previous chapter, these factors prevent an exponential growth in population.
Malthus argues the poor laws of England may temporarily alleviate individual misfortune by giving them charitable money, but this act will ultimately cause greater misery among them in the long run. Despite the large sum collected and distributed, it does not seem that the poor people of England are any better off. Some attribute it to embezzlement or mismanagement, but Malthus believes the laws themselves are ineffective, no matter how large a sum is distributed. This is because even if the poor have more to spend, the supply of food does not grow in proportion. Thus, competition among buyers drives a raise in price, which negates whatever extra was given to the poor.
Malthus is aware that an increase of purchasing power often stimulates an increase in production. However, in this case, more food will in turn drive population growth, which always increases faster than food production. In other words, handing out charity to poor people will never help them be better off. Political philosopher William Godwin (1756-1836) refers to inherited wealth as a “patent.” Malthus reprises this term to illustrate that one patent cannot increase in value without the others being proportionately devalued. Similarly, an increase in population that is not followed by an increase in the quantity of food will inevitably lower the value of everyone’s patent, forcing everyone to consume less and making everyone worse off.
In sum, the poor laws of England, which distribute charity in relation to the number of children in a household, ultimately make the lower classes worse off in two main ways. The first is they promote population growth without a proportional increase in food production. The second is it emphasizes distributing food to “a part of society that cannot in general be considered as the most valuable part,” forcibly depreciating consumable goods for everyone else. Beyond these factors, Malthus points out that charity may encourage laziness among the poor. It increases dependence on the good graces of those better off and weakens the will to save, which “ought to be held disgraceful” (27). This is because, unlike commodities, food production cannot be infinitely increased to match demand. Therefore, the poor laws of England, despite originating from benevolence, have failed to alleviate the poor from long-term misery. Had they never existed, some instances of acute suffering might still occur, but the aggregate happiness among the poor would have been greater.
Malthus proposes the removal of all parish laws to help the lower classes of society. This way, peasants will be given the liberty to settle wherever they find work, ensuring that labor forces follow the rules of the free market. Further, subsidies should be set up to encourage agriculture over manufacture and tillage over grazing. Malthus is especially concerned with increasing wages for agricultural workers over corporate jobs or apprenticeships. Finally, he proposes the establishment of county workhouses for the most impoverished. They are to work for a small sum, but the wage they earn will support both themselves and the country as a whole. These institutions would be available across counties or even nations to ensure a free labor market. Malthus believes his three-part plan is the most suited to increasing happiness among the poor.
Chapters 3-5 Analysis
Chapters 3 and 4 explore the ways in which population growth affected societies at different stages of civilization while Chapter 5 comments on its contemporary significance in England. Malthus begins by looking at “savage” societies in North America. Due to racial prejudices and a lack of adequate information, Malthus sees all “North American Indians” as a single entity (12). Their population is kept low due to their nomadism. They are incapable of accumulating enough wealth and thus cannot live with sufficient comfort to multiply quickly. Their poor treatment of women and inadequate attention to child rearing ensures a high mortality rate in infants. The next stage of civilization, that of shepherding communities, is also relatively inefficient because fertile land is used for grazing rather than agriculture. However, unlike “savage” societies, their herds provide enough food for them to multiply at a higher rate. The reason their numbers are low is therefore not primarily due to lack of subsistence but because their nomadic nature forces them into wars and conflicts over territory. Thus, vice and misery plague both “savage” and shepherding communities to keep their numbers low. Malthus admits he has limited information on both these societies, but nonetheless maintains his general reasoning is sound. This chapter’s blatant racial bias and lack of self-awareness reflects the general consensus among Malthus’s contemporaries.
Chapter 4 focuses on the historical timeline to observe “civilized” societies who primarily employ land for tilling. This includes most European nations and China. (Of note: all data on China is taken from Adam Smith’s work, The Wealth of Nations, which is criticized by modern scholars for its severe bias). All these countries have in common their adoption of tilling as the primary way to produce food. Immediately after this change, their population saw exponential growth. However, given that most of their land is currently being used—either efficiently and to full capacity in the case of China or not as efficiently due to a disproportionate emphasis on grazing in the case of England—their population has grown very slowly. They are different from “savage” societies because they also use preventive checks to keep population growth slow. In England, these checks are relevant in all strata of society: people can deliberately choose to marry later if they realize their current situation in life does not favor raising a family. Underlying this line of argument is the idea that men (and women, to some degree) are at more liberty to make choices in civilized societies. They are, generally speaking, better educated than “savages” and are thus capable of wiser decision-making. Once again here, Malthus operates on very little in ways of statistics.
Chapter 5 looks at England exclusively and notes that positive checks to growth is still the most effective way to prevent overpopulation. Malthus disagrees with the English poor laws, which he believes encourages population growth without an equal increase in food production. Although these laws are meant to relieve the poor, he argues that in the long run they cause more harm than good because they promote idleness and encourage having more children without accounting for their prolonged subsistence. Together, these three chapters successfully elucidate Malthus’s pessimistic view on the improvement of society and his belief in the fundamental importance of food production for the sustained growth of every society. Without adequate measures to increase agricultural yields, Malthus finds any instance of charity to be ultimately harmful in the long run.
