Co. One can also see that these firms were connected to firms which also possessed a variety of connections. Unsurprisingly, many of these firms survived into the following phase. Others, who had a smaller number of connections but whom were connected to many of these so-called players’ such as J. Waddington & Co. provide a less clear indication if their success or ‘major failure can be determined purely from their place within the network. The same can be said for those with very few links, such as Jeremiah Thompson or Dudley Walsh. Using the visualisation alone does provide some indication of who these individuals were to but the nature of their position within the network becomes clearer when used together with the trade database. For example, Dudley Walsh received very few shipments and did not feature later on in the network phase. However, Jeremiah Thompson who was connected to William Rathbone, transacted frequently with the Liverpool firm and eventually became a principle part-owner of the first New York Liverpool packet line. – From the visualisation of this it is also clear that the nature of firm activity in the York trade differed between firms in Liverpool and New York. In Liverpool, one notes a number exceedingly well-connected firms, from example the firms of William Rathbone (IV and V), Cropper, Benson & Co. and Martin, Hope & Thornley. Unsurprisingly, many of the firms which had their beginnings in the second phase increased their influence and position in this trade into the nineteenth century. The larger number of well-connected firms on the Liverpool side in this visualisation suggests that these firms were participating in an extensive export and import business with New York and perhaps in some cases were commission merchants. Importantly, it also suggests that access to this community without experience, wealth and connections was even more difficult than it had been in the previous phase.
Co. One can also see that these firms were connected to firms which also possessed a variety of connections. Unsurprisingly, many of these firms survived into the following phase. Others, who had a smaller number of connections but whom were connected to many of these so-called ‘major players’ such as J. Waddington & Co. provide a less clear indication if their success or failure can be determined purely from their place within the network. The same can be said for those with very few links, such as Jeremiah Thompson or Dudley Walsh. Using the visualisation alone does provide some indication of who these individuals were to but the nature of their position within the network becomes clearer when used together with the trade database. For example, Dudley Walsh received very few shipments and did not feature later on in the network phase. However, Jeremiah Thompson who was connected to William Rathbone, transacted frequently with the Liverpool firm and eventually became a principle part-owner of the first New York – Liverpool packet line. From the visualisation of this it is also clear that the nature of firm activity in the York trade differed between firms in Liverpool and New York. In Liverpool, one notes a number exceedingly well-connected firms, from example the firms of William Rathbone (IV and V), Cropper, Benson & Co. and Martin, Hope & Thornley. Unsurprisingly, many of the firms which had their beginnings in the second phase increased their influence and position in this trade into the nineteenth century. The larger number of well-connected firms on the Liverpool side in this visualisation suggests that these firms were participating in an extensive export and import business with New York and perhaps in some cases were commission merchants. Importantly, it also suggests that access to this community without experience, wealth and connections was even more difficult than it had been in the previous phase.