AP European History
AP European History
The Industrial Revolution in economic production and the French Revolution in politics combined to transform every facet of European life in the 19th century. Moving on parallel but often intersecting tracks, these two movements are often termed the Dual Revolution. Many historians consider the revolution in production, transportation, and marketing of goods associated with the Industrial Revolution the single most significant event in human history. In this chapter, we address the growth of industry in Great Britain, its spread to the continent, the effort to restore the Old Order at the Congress of Vienna, the development of political ideologies as a response to the Dual Revolution, and the revolutionary echoes rebounding through the first half of the 19th century from the French Revolution, culminating with the revolutions of 1848. This period lays the foundation for modem society, politics, and production, making it a turning point in European history.
Before exploring the reasons for Britain’s industrial lead and dominance, let’s define what is involved in the term Industrial Revolution. Each of the following three definitions expresses an essential feature of the process:
Of course, Europe had enjoyed commercial growth in the past and at times a rising standard of living. Inevitably, these periods of growth ran up against the limits of natural resources or the primitive nature of technology. Britain’s accomplishment seemed unique in applying new production techniques and technologies to exploit the full potential of nature’s bounty. Owing to the following package of advantages, Great Britain, first among European nations, realized the processes expressed above:
Geographic advantages Britain’s unique island status insulated it from continental strife, freeing it from supporting a standing army while at the same time promoting an overseas empire. No place in Britain was more than 70 miles from the ocean. Profits from trade could be reinvested in manufacturing enterprises. In addition, Britain possessed natural resources, such as coal and iron ore, necessary for industry.
Economic advantages Promotion of the Agricultural Revolution allowed for a larger population and the resulting mobile labor force to staff the new factories. Also, no nation could boast a better financial network of banks and credit institutions able to supply entrepreneurs with the capital necessary for industrial enterprises.
Political advantages Even if many nations mirrored Britain’s industrial potential, chances are those inclined toward industry exercised little influence over government policy. Not so in Britain. Through Parliament, mercantile and industrial interests enacted laws such as the Enclosure Acts to promote commercial agriculture and laissez-faire policies to protect property rights. These groups supported development of the British Navy and the acquisition of colonies, the source of raw materials and markets for British products.
Social advantages In traditional European societies, elites frowned upon the pursuit of profit (to be distinguished from the accumulation of wealth) as characteristic of the “vulgar bourgeoisie.” In Britain, aristocrats and the middle class instead shared an interest in commerce and profit accumulation. Though Protestant dissenters experienced religious toleration, their exclusion from the paid clergy, the university system, and government positions drove them into commercial and industrial pursuits. Their dissenting academies emphasized practical and technical training, and indeed, many of the early inventors derived from this group.
Many of the features outlined above correspond with capitalism, but note that industrial development can occur within a command or socialist economic model. The so-called classical economists articulated the nature of a laissez~faire capitalist economic order, though not always with a positive view of its potential. Of the three figures associated with capitalism, one (Adam Smith, “the father of capitalism”) was addressed in Chapter 9; now we look at two other important figures:
Thomas Malthus (1766-1834) Malthus believed that food supplies, which increase only incrementally, could never keep up with natural population growth, which occurs exponentially. Even today, Malthus’s Essay on Human Population (1798) represents the classic statement of concern for population growth and the need for its limitation. Malthus was pessimistic about the prospects for birth control and technological advance, though he did underestimate the productive capacity unleashed by both the Agricultural and Industrial Revolutions.
David Ricardo (1772-1823) Taking Malthus’s ideas regarding population, Ricardo introduced the concept of the Iron Law of Wages. In the short run, Ricardo argued, if the poor gain higher wages, they will simply produce more children, increasing the labor supply and driving down incomes. Thus, in the long run, humanity could not produce a higher standard of living. Once again; Ricardo miscalculated the potential of new technologies and techniques to generate wealth and the human desire for smaller families within this capitalist, consumerist regime.
Textiles led the way during the early Industrial Revolution. The many processes of textile production lent themselves to the development of cottage industry, which took hold in Britain in the 18th century. Several basic technological breakthroughs, beginning In the 1730s, paved the way for the mechanization of spinning under one roof, or the first factories. It’s important to keep in mind that production processes like mechanization and the putting-out system often complemented each other in industries with multiple steps, such as textile production. Further, mechanization did not penetrate production in other industries for several generations. As you review the textile innovations below, focus more on the incremental nature of technological change rather than the names of the inventors.
Flying shuttle (1733) John Kay halved the time of the weaving process and allowed a single loom operator to work with wider cloth by creating a shuttle that could be operated with one hand. The invention increased demand for spun yam.
Spinning Jenny (1768) Improving on the traditional spinning wheel, James Hargreaves developed the jenny, which enabled operators to spin eight or more threads with additional spindles.
Water frame (1771) and “mule” (1780) Richard Arkwright added water power to the principle of the jenny, allowing for the development of factories near rivers, which could harness this natural resource. Samuel Crompton combined the mechanical principles of the jenny and the water frame to create the spinning mule.
Power loom (1785) Edmund Cartwright’s power loom took several generations to perfect, and when it finally became cost-effective in the 1830s, it quickly drove the many hand100m weavers out of business.
By the middle of the 19th century, then, the entire textile industry had become mechanized. Demand for raw cotton jumped exponentially, which, along with the new cotton gin (1793), provided a new lease on life for American slavery. Britain thus established dominance in a key consumer item with its cheap, sturdy cotton cloth.