The Industrial Revolution Key questions: Was it a revolution? Why was Britain the First Industrial Nation? What influence did industrialisation have on people’s lives? What role did women play and how were their lives changed? Industrial Manchester from Kersal Moor, William Wylde, 1851

‘In the short span of years between the accession of George III and that of his son, William IV, the face of England changed…hamlets grew into populous towns, the chimney stacks grew to dwarf the ancient spires… Whether or not such a series of changes should be spoken of as ‘The Industrial Revolution’ might be debated at length. The changes were not merely ‘industrial’ but social and intellectual. The word ‘revolution’ implies a suddenness of change that is not, in fact, characteristic of economic processes. The system of human relationships that is sometimes called capitalism had its origins long before 1760, and attained its full development long after 1830: there is a danger of overlooking the central fact of continuity. But the phrase ‘Industrial Revolution’ has been used by a long line of historians, and has become so firmly embedded in common speech that it would be pedantic to offer a substitute.’ T S Ashton, The Industrial Revolution (1968)

Fredrick Engels, The Condition of the Working Class in England, 1845 ‘The history of the proletariat in England begins with the second half of the last century, with the invention of the steam-engine and of machinery for working cotton. These inventions gave rise, as is well known, to an industrial revolution, a revolution which altered the whole civil society. The industrial revolution is of the same importance for England as the political revolution for France, and the philosophical revolution for Germany; and the difference between England in 1760 and in 1844 is at least as great as that between France under the ancien régime and during the revolution of July.’

1. Was it a Revolution? YES These historians point to: Continued and sustained economic growth Fundamental redeployment of resources (human, material, financial) away from agriculture to manufacturing and industry Rapid increase in extent of ownership and control of resources by capitalist class accumulating for investment in commerce/manufacturing The way it was perceived at the time – evidence that contemporaries felt in the midst of something new

Was it a Revolution? NO Growth was not that quick: N F R Crafts - the economy grew only gradually until the 1820s. A E Musson - total steam horse-power in British industry had reached no more than 35,000 hp by 1800, had risen to 300,000-400,000 by 1850, but was more than 10 million hp by 1907

Was it a Revolution? NO Britain had some industry before 1760 Pat Hudson – Britain was proto-industrial before full industrialisation C W Chalkin and J H Plumb both wrote about the urbanisation, consumer expansion and development of a consumer-related society during the Eighteenth Century

Was it a Revolution? NO There were changes other than industrial change - ‘Industrial’ ignores social, economic and political changes happening at the same time. More recently historians have looked at these in a more segmented way to see how they changed independently of each other, while still influencing each other.

E A Wrigley, Continuity, Chance and Change: The Character of the Industrial Revolution in England (1990)

Industrialisation was founded on the existing situation in Britain Industrialisation was founded on the existing situation in Britain. Before the mid 18th Century urbanisation and industrialisation had advanced in Britain. The economy was already capitalist. Wrigley stressed the long-term developments in the English economy that lead to industrialisation, e.g agricultural changes in the 17th century that increased productivity, releasing labour to other activities. This created distinct economic regions with industrial and urban areas supplied by a farming hinterland. Improved transport , i.e. better roads & canals meant movement of goods and people since 17th Century.

Wrigley: Change was from an ‘advanced organic economy’ to ‘mineral based energy economy’ Shift of populations to towns and cities Growing domination of wage labour rather than self-sufficiency Use of organic products – wood, leather, charcoal Key sources of power – human, animal, natural Mineral-based economy Ability to free production from dependence on productivity of land. Linked to a reduction in the importance of organic products Establishment of new ‘synthetic’ industries, eg chemicals, gas, steel Employment of artificial power in production and eventually in transport – coal and steam

2. Why was Britain the first industrial nation? Agriculture Natural Resources Urbanisation Communications Population Growth

Population Growth England and Wales 1751 – 6.5 million Source: N Tranter, Population since the Industrial Revolution, 1973

What caused the population increase? Reduction in the death rate: T S Ashton (The Industrial Revolution, 1968) Increased fertility: Schofield and Wrigley (The Population History of England, 1981)

Why was Britain the first industrial nation? Continued… The Slave Trade (Eric Williams, Capitalism and Slavery) Entrepreneurial Class Stable political system Non-interventionist government Internal and external markets existed Good banking system Technological innovation

3. What influence did industrialisation have on people’s lives? ‘When we consider measurable quantities, it seems clear that over the years 1790-1840 the national product was increasing more rapidly than the population. But it is exceedingly difficult to assess how this product was distributed. Even if we leave other considerations aside … it is not easy to discover what share of this increase went to different sectors of the population.’ E P Thompson, The Making of the English Working Class, 1963

Changes had a detrimental effect ‘I met a man going home from work. I asked how he got on. He said, very badly. I asked him what was the cause of it. He said the hard times. “What times,” said I; “was there ever a finer summer, a finer harvest, and is there not an old wheat-rick in every farm yard?” “Ah,” said he “they make it bad for poor people for all that.” ”They?” said I “who is they?” He was silent. “Oh no, my friend,” said I “it is not they; it is that Accursed Hill [House of Commons] that has robbed you of the supper that you ought to find smoking on the table when you get home.” I gave him the price of a pot of beer, and on I went, leaving the poor dejected assemblage of skin and bone to wonder at my words.’ William Cobbett, Rural Rides, 1826

Changes had a detrimental effect ‘What is true of London, is true of Manchester, Birmingham, Leeds, is true of all great towns. Everywhere barbarous indifference, hard egotism on one hand, and nameless misery on the other, everywhere social warfare, every man's house in a state of siege, everywhere reciprocal plundering under the protection of the law, and all so shameless, so openly avowed that one shrinks before the consequences of our social state as they manifest themselves here undisguised, and can only wonder that the whole crazy fabric still hangs together.’ Fredrick Engels, ‘The Great Towns’, The Condition of the Working Class in England,1845.

Changes had a detrimental effect ‘These slums are pretty equally arranged in all the great towns of England … The streets are generally unpaved, rough, dirty, filled with vegetable and animal refuse, without sewers or gutters, but supplied with foul, stagnant pools instead. Moreover, ventilation is impeded by the bad, confused method of building of the whole quarter, and since many human beings here live crowded into a small space, the atmosphere that prevails in these working-men's quarters may readily be imagined. Further, the streets serve as drying grounds in fine weather; lines are stretched across from house to house, and hung with wet clothing.’ Engels (1848)

‘Of the third class or the very poor I chose the following ‘type’ … The family here lived in a small slanting-roofed house, partly stripped of its tiles. More than one half of the small leaden squares of the first floor window were covered with brown paper, puffing out and crackling in the wind, while through the greater part of the others were thrust out ball-shaped bundles of rags, to keep out the breeze… It took me some time after I had entered the apartment before I could get accustomed to the smoke that came pouring into the room from the chimney…. On a mattress on the floor lay a pale-faced girl – ‘eighteen years on last twelfth cake-day’ – her drawn up form showing on the patch-work counterpane that covered her. She had just been confined and the child had died! A little straw ,stuffed into an old tick, was all she had to lie upon, and even that had been given up to her by the mother until she was well enough to work again… The room was about nine feet square, and furnished a home for three women. The ceiling slanted like that of a garret and was the colour of old leather, excepting a few white patches where the tenants had rudely mended it…They had made a carpet out of three or four mats… ‘But we only pay ninepence a week rent,’ said the old woman ‘and mustn’t grumble.’ Henry Mayhew, London Labour and the London Poor, first published in 1851

‘It was a town of red brick, or of brick that would have been red if the smoke and ashes had allowed it; but as matters stood, it was a town of unnatural red and black like the painted face of a savage. It was a town of machinery and tall chimneys, out of which interminable serpents of smoke trailed themselves for ever and ever, and never got uncoiled. It had a black canal in it, and a river that ran purple with ill-smelling dye, and vast pile of buildings full of windows where there was rattling and trembling all day long, and where the piston of the steam engine worked monotonously up and down, like the head of an elephant in a state of melancholy madness. It contained several large streets all very like one another, and many small streets, still more like one another, inhabited by people equally like one another, who all went in and out at the same hours, with the same sound upon the pavements, to do the same work, and to whom everyday was the same as yesterday and tomorrow, and every year the counterpart of the last and the next.’ Charles Dickens, Hard Times, 1854

Arguments against the detrimental effects Experience differed greatly, depending on one’s birth place, work place, occupation, gender etc. Michael Anderson has proved that close kinship and friendship groups formed and these helped each other (Family Structure in Nineteenth-Century Lancashire, 1971) Some evidence to indicate there was an overall rise in incomes per head, and large scale subsistence catastrophe, like in Ireland in 1840, was avoided Were conditions much worse than before?

William Hogarth, Gin Lane (1751)

4. What role did women play and how were their lives changed? Ivy Pinchbeck, Women Workers and the Industrial Revolution, 1750-1850 (1930): Women gained the opportunity to be independent Jane Humphries: Women’s work as ‘hidden’ Pat Hudson: Great variation in experience depending on class, region, skill, family etc & variation throughout the century Women’s jobs were less stable/constant than men’s

The important role of women’s work Maxine Berg and Pat Hudson: women and children played a key role in early industrialisation Maxine Berg argues that it was the dynamic ‘light’ industries that women were involved in that contributed most to overall growth – the textile industry added 45.9% of value added in British Industry in 1770 and 46% in 1831. Women (and children) made profit and growth possible

Work became increasingly gendered The Earl of Shaftesbury articulated his idea of appropriate work for women in 1859: ‘The instant that the work becomes minute, individual and personal; the instant that it leaves the open field and touches the home; the instant that it requires tact, sentiment and delicacy; from that instant it passes into the hands of women.’ The renegotiation of the gender division of labour was an important element of the process of industrialisation itself. Women’s social positions were changed as a result of the perception that their work was low status and had little economic value.