Hello,

I've been reading a lot about early modern development and the establishment of the grounds for the post-1500 European population boom. Most authors seem to concur that prior to 1500, the population obeyed Malthusian rules, and was restricted by the amount of arable land. There was a very slow increase thanks to minor increases in agricultural productivity, but for the most part, an area was constrained by its crop production. However, after 1500, starting in the Netherlands and then expanding to other countries like England and the Nordic group, population growth began to increase, although still at a linear rate, unlike the exponential growth of the Industrial Revolution.

This seems to imply to me that what's happening at this stage is one of two things a) that land productivity is increasing linearly - enough to sustain a similar increase in population, or b) countries like England and the Netherlands were becoming disproportionately wealthy enough to import large amounts of grain from other countries (although this doesn't explain the slightly later European-wide rise). What I don't understand is why this is, and why it didn't spread to other countries faster. Was there a key type of new plough invented, or a different system of land holdings that incentivised higher productivity, or some either series of key inventions or discoveries? If there was a specific series of inventions that led to this agricultural improvement, why did they not spread to other countries very quickly - France and Spain don't really see population booms until the Industrial era. How come these inventions seem to occur at a regular rate, instead of a one-off increase as a result of a one-off invention, and then no more? Alternatively, if England and the Netherlands had become wealthy enough to import excess grain, that implies they were disproportionately wealthy before the population boom of 1500 (1600 for England). If this is true, what lead them to become disproportionately wealthy so early on?

Second, why were England and the Netherlands capable of sustaining growth per capita at the same time as this population growth? It seems intuitive to me that if you experience population growth, but you're operating in a pre-industrial society, then you shouldn't necessarily see per capita growth unless capital productivity which sustains wealth is increasing at a faster rate than agricultural productivity which sustains population. If this was the case, what key inventions, discoveries, or social changes caused this to happen in England and the Netherlands? If it was something like the establishment of artisan guilds that could make high quality, in-demand products (just hypothesising, this is almost certainly not right), why did a) this happen in these countries first, and b) why was it not copied by other countries quickly?

Thank you very much for any answers. I'd really appreciate some good reading material as well, particularly stuff available online. :)