1. The Making of the Modern World Wednesday 26 October 2016, 9-10am THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION: CONSEQUENCES Sarah Richardson sarah.richardson@warwick.ac.uk

2. The Industrial Revolution: Different Explanations Exp. 1. Until the 1970s (in particular c. 1955-75): Economic Growth - key sectors (esp. cotton textiles) -Factory production - Use of new technologies Exp. 2. From the mid 1970s to the mid 1990s: Manufactures - a wider range of sectors - the continuity with pre-industrial manufacturing (manufactures) - consumption - two new concepts:- proto-industrialisation - industrious revolution David Cannadine, “The Present and the Past in the English Industrial Revolution 1800-1900”, Past and Present, 108 (1984), pp. 131-72. Exp. 3. Since the mid 1990s: - the IR in a more global perspective, - new concept of ‘divergence’

3. Exp. 3. Since the mid 1990s: The Global Re-interpretation of the IR This has been brought about by: a. The industrial decline of Britain and most of Europe (the places of the first IR) b. The industrialization of Asia, esp. China and India.

4. Exp. 3. Since the mid 1990s: The industrial decline of Britain and most of Europe Industry accounted for 40% of the British economy in 1900 but only 20% in 1990. The Industrial cities of the Midlands and the North of England declined in the early 1990s … but they revived in the late 1990s thanks to financial and consumer services and outsourcing within a global economy Historians asked: - What part was played in the history of industrialization by Britain’s connections with the wider world - the relationship between the IR and Western dominion over the world

5. Exp. 3. Since the mid 1990s: The industrialisation of Asia (China and India)

6. Was this an achievement contingent upon a prior superiority in economy, mind or culture, or was it mere accident? ‘why did Europe industrialise and grow rich and Asia did not? And this question indirectly asks ‘why is Asia industrialising now?’ de-Europeanise of de-Anglicise the IR

8. Chris Bayly, The Birth of the Modern World (Cambridge, 2004) ‘it was European ships and commercial companies, not Asian and African producers of slaves, spices, calicoes or porcelains which were able to capture the greatest ‘value added’ as world trade expanded in the eighteenth century’ and adds that ‘Europe connected, subjugated and made tributary other peoples’ “industrious revolutions”’. Exp. 3. Since the mid 1990s: (a) The Lost Opportunities of China

9. Exp. 3. Since the mid 1990s: (b) Global Luxury and Consumption Importance of Asian luxuries and exotic American foodstuffs These were stimula to European consumer goods industries See: Maxine Berg, ‘In Pursuit of Luxury: Global History and British Consumer Goods in the Eighteenth Century’ Past and Present 182 (Feb. 2004 ), pp. 85-142 Maxine Berg, Luxury and Pleasure in Eighteenth-Century Britain (2005), chap. 2

10. Europe moved from a common path of economic development to a new, higher level. Europe industrialised while China, but also India and other places around the world did not. Europe experienced a ‘Great Divergence’ thanks to: - abundant supplies of coal - presence of colonial markets. Kenneth Pomeranz, The Great Divergence: China, Europe and the Making of the Modern World Economy (2000). Exp. 3. Since the mid 1990s: (c) The ‘Great Divergence’

11. The Great Divergence

12. 7. Why was Britain first? Britain had a very low share of the population occupied in agriculture; France by contrast remained a very agricultural society. As late as 1840 the output per worker in France was only 60% of that of England: Britain was much more productive And finally that population growth was gradual in France, while in England it rose rapidly.

13. 7. Why was Britain first? 1.Comparative advantage in exportable commodities - Britain was successfully exporting part of its industrial production (60% of British cotton output was exported compared to 10% in France) 2. International specialization - colonial markets were particularly important and were dominated by Britain 3. War and economic protection - Britain did not bear the burden of physical destruction - but the country was heavily taxed to pay for the army and navy - it was successful at the end of the Napoleonic wars.

14. 8. The First Industrial Revolution and the Second Industrial Revolution new materials - steel, chemicals – Germany leads new energy - steam turbine, gas, petroleum, electricity – Germany leads mechanisation – machine tools, interchangeable parts – U.S. leads

16. 8. The First Industrial Revolution and the Second Industrial Revolution interchangability of parts, … the ways in which products were composed an assembled ‘scientific management’ of production lines In the Second Industrial Revolution, the Americans then the Germans took the lead

17. 9. Britain Falling Behind The world Manufacturing Production, 1870-1911 (in %) In %18701881- 1885 1896- 1900 1906- 1910 1913 Great Britain 31,826,619,514,714,0 France10,38,67,16,4 Germany13,213,916,615,915,7 Italy2,4 2,73,12,7 Belgium2,92,52,22,02,1 Russia3,73,45,0 5,5 US23,328,630,135,335,8 Japan--0,61,01,2 Others12,414,016,216,6 World100,0

18. 9. Britain Falling Behind Why did Britain fall behind Germany and the US in the period 1870-1914? The markets of empire Competitive advantage in low productivity industry

19. 10. The Modernisation of the Germany Economy 1. The State was proactive 2. High levels of investments – support of banks 3. Welfare state – worker’s housing, social insurance, pensions, etc. The result was: 1891-1911 – the German population increased from 49 million to 65 million. Output increased from £23 per person to £37 per person a year Trade increased by 200%

20. Paths to Industrialization The ‘British’ model of coal & iron-fired industrialisation (Germany had many of the same raw materials as GB) Late-comer industrialisers benefit from technology transfer Role of foreign investors in early industrialisation Role of state in German investment (Prussian government interest in railways, coal mines) Role of big investment banks (often represented on board of companies)

21. New Technologies in Industrial Production in Germany 1870-1900 Heavy industry English blast furnace technology Coal from Silesia and the Ruhr Ores from Lorraine Bessemer process 1879 Stainless steel 1912 Mechanical engineering Locomotives Internal combustion engine 1876 Cars 1889 Diesel engines 1896 Zeppelins (airships) 1900 Airplanes 1905 Electrical Industry Dynamos (Siemens) Electrical engines Telephones Power stations Films X-ray units Chemical Industry Artificial fertilizers Dyes Plastics 1885 Pharmaceuticals Safety explosives 1885

22. Electrical industry - Siemens Siemens pointer telegraph, 1847 Electrical dynamo, 1866

23. Steel – Krupp, Essen Krupp steelworks, Essen, stages of growth 1819, 1852, 1912 Pioneering of seamless railway wheels Alfred Krupp, 1812-87, the ‘Cannon King’ Develops Bessemer process for purifying steel Close contacts with arms industry

24. Krupp & munitions Krupp’s cast-steel cannon at the 1851 Exhibition in London Krupp’s 42cm ‘Dicke Bertha’ siege gun (used to reduce Liege in 1914 and shell Paris)

25. Causes for German Industrial Success –Population growth provided both a work force and a market for manufactured goods –Germany had ample raw materials –Geography – rivers and railways provided transport –Good education system provided a skilled workforce –Expansion of banks free from regulation encouraged investment and a close relationship between banking and industry

26. 11. Winners and Losers Rapid industrial and economic growth brought about social change. Some in society were obvious beneficiaries, others didn’t do quite so well. The most obvious beneficiaries were the industrialists and bankers The working class were essential to the growth of the European economy, but often lived in poor conditions

27. Cellar Dwelling 1838

28. Competing Stats: German Wages

29. Competing Stats: UK Life Expectancy

30. Competing Stats: Height

31. Round About a Pound a Week Mrs Grimsey's weekly household expenditure (1911) Rent = 39% Fuel = 13% Food = 45% (mostly bread, potatoes, rice and flour) Other = 3%

32. Conclusion Why are some nations so rich and some so poor? Dependent on organisation of work, flexibility of workforce, implementation of new technologies, infrastructure (population/urbanisation/empires) But taking the lead in one environment may lead to stagnation/decline in another Industrialisation doesn’t necessarily benefit the whole population