why would suburbs built between 1820 and 1914 in england be smaller than those built after 1914?

Question

something to do with the war??

Answer 1

No real facts here, but thinking logically. The overall population was smaller. The ability and ease of commuting was much greater and more available after 1914 then before. More public transportation and more privately owned vehicles. Education may have played a part as well. Men coming home from war were not satisfied to return to rural settings and farmlands wanted to be closer to work in cities, but not live in the immediate city area. Also, more women began working outside the home during the war and this increased with time. Just a few ideas, though nothing to back them up.

Answer 2

I'm sorry that I don't have any of my books here in this office -- they're in my office at home... The answer to your question is that this was the dawning of the industrial revolution and the country was shifting from a rural, small farm, aggricultural community to that of the industrialized city. Families were shifting to the city in search of a better life. Still, there was a severe lack of money by those shifting. Labor in the factories and mines was at best difficult and the pay was pathetically, just slightly above that of slave labor. Children and unskilled women were employed to do the most arduous and risky jobs. Families caught in this quagmire simply could not aford to live in anything resembling something "nice." It wasn't until the various labor laws came into effect that things then began to improve. As for those laws, there were several, most beginning around 1833. Most too, were geared towards the employment of children.
The shift then around 1914, was that England was coming into it's own as a major super power in the world of Industry. France, Germany, Austria were all heavily engaging in warfare. Russia and the U.S. were still primarily aggricultural. England as a super power now had an economy to support a better lifestyle for its citizens. As the war progressed (digressed) England geared itself towards a war materiel industry and suffered very little in realsestate damage due to bombings. The other European countries however suffered greatly. England, with labor laws in place and a good number of men being sent off to war, had a very low unemployment rate. The raw materials necessary for maintaining a wartime industry were sent in from its colonies elsewhere. Germany several decades earlier (von Bismarck) had stated of the land grab going on in Africa, that Germany's interests were in Germany and did very little in the way of colonization. This would during the war years, be a major downfall as Germany had very little in natural resources and could not sustain it's war efforts. France was layed waste with shelling and bombardment. Russia fell to internal strife with it's revolution. Again, I'm sorry that I don't have my books here to give you some direct quotes. Hope this helps.

Answer 3

Because of the 1925 land reforms and the enclosures acts.

Also because most land at that time was held by the aristocratic familys and when lots of their sons died in the first world war loads of land had to be sold to pay for the death duties. So other people started to own land that had previously been held for centurys by the same family. Shame really then all the design when out the window and we ended up with a load of council estates being built in almost every large country houses back garden....

Answer 4

The switch from stone to brick construction made possible the rapid construction of houses.

Answer 5

Smaller in what way? size of houses or quantity of houses?

Answer 6

Not sure but my guess is that it would have to do with the reconstruction after WW I.