From Conservapedia

Britain

Bradford Industrial Museum.

Anrefers to the widespread creation of new industries in a country, and more generally to the radical transformation of as economy from farming to manufacturing. The most famous industrial revolution occurred in western Europe, especially England and Scotland, 1750s to 1830s. The U.S. experienced its industrial revolution in the early 19th century; Germany in the late 19th century; Russia in the mid 20th century; China and India in the late 20th and early 21st centuries. Third world countries have not (yet) experienced their industrial revolution.

The Industrial Revolution was a period of economic transformation in Britain from the 1750s to the 1830s, characterized by the growth of a new system comprising factories, railroads, coal mining and business enterprises using new technologies that it sponsored. The new system operated first on textiles, then spread to other sectors and by the mid 19th century totally transformed the British economy and society, setting up sustained growth; it spread to parts of America and Europe and modernized the world economy. Although localized to certain parts of Britain (the London area was not included), its impact was felt worldwide on migration and trade, society and politics, on cities and countryside, and affected the remotest areas. The growth rate in the British GDP was 1.5% per year (1770-1815), doubling to 3.0% (1815-1831).[1]

Steam engine

In the 1760s James Watt, an engineer from Scotland, created an engine that was powered by steam. Though it was initially used to pump water from mines, the steam engine quickly spread to other industries—ensuring that the industrial revolution would prevail. The spread of the steam engine increased the demand for coal many times.

The coal-fueled steam engine was a decisive factor in the Industrial Revolution, providing cheap, controllable power vastly superior to power from oxen, horses, and competitive with water mills. The first cost-effective steam engine appeared after James Watt, repairing a Newcomen steam engine, noted that 80% of its energy was lost by the alternate heating and cooling of the cylinder. In 1769 Watt patented a separate condenser, which made it possible to keep the cylinder hot, an air pump to exhaust the cylinder after each stroke, and a cylinder head to force the piston down by steam instead of atmospheric pressure. Many other inventors in the next 100 years perfected elements of the steam engine. Their challenge in maximizing the power output was to use high temperatures and very high steam pressures, without having the engine explode.[2]

Success in building larger, more efficient engines meant that the cost of energy fell steadily. Entrepreneurs found uses for stationary engines in turning the machines in a factory or the pumps at a mine, while mobile engines were put into locomotives and ships (where they turned paddles or, later, propellers). The use of water power was growing too, so that in 1830 steam mills and water mills were about equal (at 165,000 horsepower each); by 1879 Britain obtained 2.1 million horsepower from steam engines, and 230,000 from water.[3]

In 1831, the Glasgow area, with a population of 200,000, operated 328 steam-engines. Sixty were on steamboats; the largest steamboat was only 387 tons and it had two engines, each of 110 horse-power. The other engines were used in the 107 cotton mills, many of which contained several. The average engine had a 26 horse-power output. Other industries were just starting to use the new engines.[4]

Textiles

The industrial revolution was headed by the British cotton industry. For centuries this market had been dominated by individuals; cloth would be spun and woven by hand. However, in the 1700s advances in technology began to drive out the homemade cotton industry. Such machines Richard Arkwright's water frame spinning machine and Edmund Cartwright's power loom could make higher quality cloth and sell it for a cheaper price. Britain's cotton textile production was boosted beyond any competition.

For centuries the spinning of fibers into yarn and the weaving of yarn into cloth had remained a manual operation. In England, for example, women and children, working at home, combed cotton with wire brushes and spun it by hand; the father then wove the cotton on a hand loom. Output was expensive and consumed locally. Most of Britain's cloth was home-made from wool in the West Country, Yorkshire and Lancashire. 1702 a critical turning point occurred when Thomas Cotchett and George Sorocold built a silk mill powered by a waterwheel at Derby. Their mill was probably Britain's first factory, for it was a single establishment with complex machinery, a source of power and accommodation for workers.

Machine productions was the answer; it would be faster, cheaper and more uniform in quality; the machine was needed to made large scale marketing possible. Textile machines were invented and improved in Britain to increase the speed of spinning and weaving. The first key innovation was the fly-shuttle, invented by John Kay in 1733. On the hand loom the operator pulled the shuttle carrying the woof from one side of the warp to the other. Kay used hammers which propelled the shuttle back and forth between the warp threads. In 1764, James Hargreaves invented the spinning jenny, which increased productivity per worker by a factor of eight.

In 1761, the Society for the Encouragement of Arts and Manufacturies offered a prize of £50 for a spinning machine that could turn fiber into yarn and replace the hand-operated jersey wheel. Numerous inventors tried their hand; in 1768 Richard Arkwright (1732-92) employed John Kaye, a clockmaker from Warrington, to help build wooden models. In 1769 they invented the water frame, which passed the carded cotton between successive pairs of rollers, each pair in turn revolving with greater velocity, so that a great number of threads of any degree of fineness and hardness could be drawn. The spun thread was now strong enough to be used as warp. At first he relied on water power, but as the machinery grew more complex he turned to steam engines for power. Arkwright made a great fortune from his patents. While his role as the main creator of the factory system has been exaggerated, Arkwright was remarkable in his ability to adapt other people's techniques, raise funds from investors, and persevere with his vision of a mechanized textile factory. His Arkwright network of mills across Britain employed over over 5000 workers by 1782.[5] In 1779 Samuel Crompton combined the Hargreaves and Arkwright ideas into the "muslin machine" (or "spinning mule") which could spin yarn for making muslin (until then imported from India). Originally known as the muslin wheel, or hall-in-the-wood wheel, In 1785, Dr. Edmund Cartwright invented the first power loom, which mechanized weaving operations and eventually developed into the modern power loom. In 1794, Eli Whitney, an American, patented the cotton gin, which separated the cotton fibers from the seeds, making short-fiber cotton grown in America the major raw material for the first stage of the industrial revolution. Between 1781 and 1791 imports of cotton into Britain quadrupled, reaching 100 million pounds in 1815 and 263 million in 1830, and kept growing until the supply was cut by war in 1861.[6] In 1811 Britain saw more than 5,000,000 spindles at work, of which 310,500 used the Arkwright principle, 4,600,00 that of Crompton's mule spindle, and 156,000 that of Hargreaves's jenny.

In 1751, Britain exported £46,000 of cotton cloth; by 1800 this had soared to £5.4 million and by 1861 to £46.8 million. The cloth made for cheaper and better quality clothing, and was in demand across Europe and the world.

The United States followed the British lead, using stolen blueprints and illegally immigrating engineers. Samuel Slater (1768-1835) of Rhode Island pulled American cotton-spinning technology by constructing carding, drawing, and roving machinery, and by determining the operating and gearing ratios necessary to use water power. By 1850 the American had built their own industrial revolutions around textiles, and use of abundant water power in new England.

Railways

See Railway History The growth of industry soon brought to light the need for a better system of transportation. While canals and roads did improve, they were soon overshadowed by a means of transportation that held great promise: the railroads. The railroads may have been that most important factor of the industrial revolution. Railways had existed as early as 1500, but in 1700s the primitive wooden rails were replaced with wrought iron. These new rails enabled horses to pull even heavier loads with relative ease. But dependence on horsepower did not last for long. In 1804 the first steam-powered locomotive pulled 10 tons of ore and 70 people at 5 miles per hour. This new technology improved dramatically; locomotives reached speeds of 50 miles per hour! While the railroads revolutionized transportation, they further contributed to the growth of the industrial revolution by causing a great increase in the demand for iron and coal.

Coal mining

see Coal Mining: History The fuel problem was severe. Wood was scarce—the forests were gone. Water power required fast-flowing rivers of the sort that were abundant in America but uncommon in Europe. Horses could be used, but the efficient solution was fueling steam engines with coal, of which the island had an abundance. Before 1750 miners worked in shallow digs with few safety devices; floods, cave-ins, and gas explosions were omnipresent threats. Productivity was low. Even before Sir Humphry Davy invented the safety lamp in 1815 ways were found to detect the presence of choke damp, carbon monoxide, and coal dust; ventilation of mines was improved; systems of siphoning and continuous pumping were installed to rid the mines of water; and improved methods were introduced for sinking shafts. An early use of steam engines was to pump water out of the mines; the first locomotives pulled cars of coal out of the shafts. In 1700 2.5 million tons of coal were mined; in 1800 10 million tons; in 1861 57 million tons.[7]

Iron and steel

see Steel industry

Throughout the Middle Ages iron was smelted using charcoal, however in the eighteenth century, new methods of iron production were discovered; the resulting iron was of higher quality than ever before. These advances, such as the process developed by Henry Cort in 1780's, greatly encouraged the use of machinery in other industries.

Iron was so durable that it became the preferred metal for tools and equipment until displaced by steel after 1860.[8] Britain had iron ores but lacked a process to produce iron in quantity until in 1760 John Smeaton invented a blast furnace that could smelt iron both quickly and cheaply. His invention used an air-blast produced by a fan run by a waterwheel. In 1783 Henry Cort introduced the puddling, or reverberatory furnace, in which the final product was a pasty solid instead of a liquid. It was rolled into balls, squeezed and rolled to eliminate the impurities, or slag. The result was malleable iron in large quantities. The greatest of the early ironmasters, John Wilkinson (1728-1808) invented new machinery to process the iron. In 1779 the first cast-iron bridge was constructed across the Severn; in 1790 the first iron ship was launched. By 1830 Britain was producing 700,000 tons of iron a year; the amount quadrupled a quarter-century later, with centers in Scotland, South Wales, and Staffordshire. Railway builders were the chief customer. In 1847-48 they bought 3 million tons for rolling-stock, bridge building, and station building for 2000 new miles, plus the demands of the 3000 previously built miles of railway.[9]

Social impact

The technological innovations of the Industrial Revolution came many decades before their impact on society was visible. An early response was mob attacks on textile mills from "Luddites", who were opposed to the mechanised system which brought unemployment to those involved in hand-spinning. Lancashire mills, particularly, incurred trouble and many were destroyed by fire.[10] Historians of the emergence of a working class consciousness however point the 1830s and 1840s, and study complex causes, such as the demand for greater participation in society and politics sparked by the Napoleonic wars and the rise of Methodism. Major demographic changes became visible starting in the 1840s.[11]

Standard of living

Historians have for a century vigorously debated the impact of the industrial revolution on living standards, wages, and (more recently), the heights and weights of workers.

In general industrial workers who were employed did better than farm laborers, and thus the heavy movement from farm to city. Unemployed workers, however, were better off back on the farm where their families were motre likely to provide food and housing for them, and there was always a some farm work to do.

Japan

Japan was the first Asian nation to undergo an industrial revolution. Sponsored by the state from the 1860s, it copied European models, bringing in machinery and experts. The agrarian sector was capable of feeding the growing population, and provided a steady stream of workers to the fast growing industrial cities. Japan's industrialization grew rapidly after 1890, stimulated primarily by internal demand, and financed primarily by internal capital. It first developed a large textile industry. It had some coal and increased its production, but demand outran supply, so overall Japan became an importer of coal. It imported iron ore from China.[12]

Historiography

English historian Arnold Toynbee introduced the concept in 1884 into English after the French political writer Louis Blanqui used it in 1837,[13] with the term itself being used by Blanqui in reference to the French Revolution.[14] Historians debate the dating of the Industrial Revolution. T.S. Ashton places it roughly between 1760 and 1830. In the early 20th century historians (such as Charles Beard) looking for the social forces they thought controlled history, emphasized industrialization and urbanization. These were forces unleashed by the industrial revolution. By the mid 20th century attention was turning to the broader concept of "modernization," which included industrialization, urbanization, and psychological changes and changes in values. Eric Hobsbawm called it "probably the most important event in human history," but emphasizes the effects were not fully felt until the 1830s or 1840s.[15] By the late 20th century postmodern historians largely stopped looking for deep explanatory forces, or sharp turning points, and stressed instead complexity and interrelationships. Crafts has emphasized the slow overall growth rate of the economy before 1830, suggesting that a real revolution should have higher rates. The higher rates came after 1830, but only after the industrial system and the new growth-oriented mindset had been well established in numerous sectors. The era is was a decisive point for modern technology, and for the formation of the working class.[16]

Goldstone (2002) argues that many premodern and non-Western economies show spurts or efflorescences of economic growth, including sustained increases in both population and living standards, in urbanization, and in underlying technological change. Medieval Europe, Golden Age Holland, and Qing China, among other cases, show such remarkable efflorescences of impressive economic growth.Yet these did not lead to modern industrialized societies. The distinctive feature of Western economies since 1800 has not been growth per se, but growth based on a specific set of elements: engines to extract motive power from fossil fuels, to a degree hitherto rarely appreciated by historians; the application of empirical science to understanding both nature and practical problems of production; and the marriage of empirically oriented science to a national culture of educated craftsmen and entrepreneurs broadly educated in basic principles of mechanics and experimental approaches to knowledge. This combination developed from the seventeenth to nineteenth centuries only in Britain, and was unlikely to have developed anywhere else in world history.

Pomeranz, The Great Divergence: China, Europe, and the Making of the Modern World Economy(2000) asks one of the classic questions of history: Why did sustained industrial growth begin in northwest Europe, despite surprising similarities between advanced areas of Europe and East Asia? Specifically he compares Britain and China in depth.

The measures of productivity over the period show major transitions in the manufacture of textiles; the consumption of coal; and the production of iron goods. Coupled with these are the movement of the population from rural to urban environments; and the rapid development and use of turnpikes, canals, railways, steamships and the telegraph. Above all it was the invention by entrepreneurs of the factory as a complex social-economic system that combined financing, engineering, raw materials, transportation and supervised workers as they made a profitable product whose sale in turned fed the expansion of the system.

Due to Frederick Engels and Bertrand Russell's writings, however, the Industrial Revolution was falsely stated to have caused unspeakable misery within America and Britain where machinery forced people to work and be oppressed. F. A. Hayek has since gone on to set the record straight.[17]

See also

References

Bibliography

Britain and world

Social history

Allen, Robert C. Farm to Factory: A Reinterpretation of the Soviet Industrial Revolution (2003)

(2003) Checkland, S. G. The Rise of Industrial Society in England, 1815-1885, 1964.

1964. Clapham, J. H. An Economic History of Modern Britain: The Early Railway Age, 1820-1850 (1926) online edition

(1926) online edition de Vries, Jan. 1994. "The Industrial Revolution and the Industrious Revolution." Journal of Economic History 58.1: 249–270. in JSTOR

58.1: 249–270. in JSTOR Feinstein, Charles H. "Pessimism Perpetuated: Real Wages and the Standard of Living in Britain during and after the Industrial Revolution." Journal of Economic History 1998. 58.3: 625–658. in JSTOR

1998. 58.3: 625–658. in JSTOR Halevy, Elie. A History of the English People in the Nineteenth Century. Volume: 1: England in 1815 (1913) pp 256–337 online edition

(1913) pp 256–337 online edition Hobsbawm, Eric J. The Age of Revolution: 1789-1848 1962, by leading Marxist

1962, by leading Marxist Lindert, Peter H., and Jeffrey G. Williamson. "English Workers' Living Standards during the Industrial Revolution: A New Look," The Economic History Review , New Series, Vol. 36, No. 1 (Feb., 1983), pp. 1–25 in JSTOR

, New Series, Vol. 36, No. 1 (Feb., 1983), pp. 1–25 in JSTOR Morgan, Kenneth. The Birth of Industrial Britain: Social Change, 1750-1850 (2004), 184pp

(2004), 184pp Smelser, Neil J. Social Change in the Industrial Revolution: An Application of Theory to the British Cotton Industry;; (1959) online edition

Snooks, Graeme Donald, ed. Was the Industrial Revolution Necessary? 1994. online edition

1994. online edition Stearns, Peter N. The Industrial Revolution in World History (1998)

(1998) Taylor, A. J. P. (ed.) The Standard of Living in Britain in the Industrial Revolution, 1975,

1975, Wrigley, E. A. Continuity, Chance, and Change: The Character of the Industrial Revolution in England. 1988.

United States

Clark, Victor S. History of Manufactures in the United States: 1607-1860 (1916) online at books.google.com

(1916) online at books.google.com Copeland, Melvin Thomas. The Cotton Manufacturing Industry of the United States (1912) ch 1. online

(1912) ch 1. online Mathias, Peter, and M. M. Postan, eds. The Cambridge Economic History of Europe from the Decline of the Roman Empire, Vol. 7, Pt. 2 The Industrial Economies: Capital, Labour and Enterprise, The United States, Japan and Russia, (1978)

(1978) Nettels, Curtis. The Emergence of a National Economy, 1775-1815 (1962)

(1962) Olson, James S. Encyclopedia of the Industrial Revolution in America (2001)

(2001) Taylor, George Rogers. The Transportation Revolution, 1815-1860 (1951)