Around
1770, Britain made some remarkable advances in the field of manufacturing
industry, Pruning and transport giving it a position of world economic
leadership that she was to retain for well over a century. These achievements
were remarkable and they came in the first place in terms of technological
innovations in a cluster of industries - the Watt steam engine, the
mechanization of cotton spinning and weaving, the production of coke-smelted
pig iron in blast furnaces and of large quantities of iron products by
extruding and rolling, the first railway lines and so forth, which reinforced
each other. Initially they were of limited importance to the whole country.
However
soon this became an unbroken chain of inventions and innovations leading to an
irreversible improvement in the way of making things. The rapid advances in
science and technology led to development and changes in industrial
organization. The Factory-system became the dominant mode of production - and
it caught the eyes of contemporary observers. This system meant of course the
concentration of the work force, a new discipline within the workplace, which
had been unknown of in previous times. Large factories could make full use of
the potential of new technologies, for example steam driven engines; this meant
large gains in productivity, on a scale never previously experienced. Factories
were designed to turn out cheap mass produced goods, such as cotton and woolen
yarn, cotton cloth, cast metal goods etc.
These
changes though far-reaching, did not happen all at once. In fact, recent
research has shown that the Industrial Revolution in Britain was much slower
than had been previously thought, and that the new technologies lived, for a
long time, side by side with older pre-manufacturing technologies. For example,
waterpower was still very important and prevailed over steam power in the
United Kingdom (UK) well into the 19lh century and craftsmen and their
workshops remained for a long time far more important in aggregate terms than
modern factories. A few points stand out, however. These are:
·
The process of industrialization in the UK happened in a unique
and totally unplanned way; it could not have been planned, since it had never
happened before.
·
It was also slower to take full shape than previously believed
and certainly slower than in the Continent later on, when industrialization
could be encouraged, stimulated, copied from Britain at least to some extent.
·
The fact that industrialization was slow does not mean that it
was less radical and impressive.
·
Initially dramatic progress took place in various scattered
branches of industry and it did not affect the large bulk of the country.
However, with one development feeding upon another, eventually the whole
country was transformed and the changes began to show up everywhere.
·
Some changes were very dramatic, and in fact more dramatic in
Britain than anywhere else.
·
The question arises, why was Britain the first? A wide range of
answers has been given to this question. The unique advantages of Britain were:
·
A stable, relatively open political system, which allowed for
efficient public finances and encouraged the development of a capital market.
Also, it made possible for Britain to fight and win wars and to keep a large,
powerful navy, thus capturing vital foreign markets.
·
Advanced and commercial agricultural system that was able to
support the growing population by sustained rises in productivity.
·
A remarkable growth in population since 1750, which provided an
enormous workforce as also consumers to the economy.
Spread
of the Industrial Revolution to the rest of Europe: There was not a very big
development lag between Britain and the rest of Europe. This probably was
because of the geographical proximity of Britain and the northwestern corner of
the continent. Considering the period between 1750 and 1820 embracing most of
France, the Low Countries, part of the German States and Scandinavia,
Switzerland and also Northern Italy and the most advanced parts of the Hapsburg
Empire - it may be noted that a long process of capital accumulation had taken
place, incomes were higher as a result of moderate economic progress throughout
many decades.
Capital,
labour and land markets were fairly developed. The society was open and
commercial and it had, largely, broken away from feudalism. Skills were
widespread among the population, and there was a record of technological
progress. Although the nobility was still very powerful, the influence of the
bourgeoisie (merchants, investors, professionals etc) had been growing for some
time and in many towns, the bourgeoisie were the leading class. Agriculture had
made important progress and there were important areas of domestic industry
organized in far reaching commercial networks. Finally, international trade was
in the hands of not only the British, but also shared by Dutch, French, German
and Danish merchant houses.
All
this did not prevent Britain from leaping ahead in the process of
industrialization, but the gap was never so wide that the other countries could
not expect to fill it in a reasonably short time. The preconditions were
certainly there. In fact, the gap between Britain and North West Europe was
much less than that between the most advanced areas of Europe and the more
backward ones, in the South and East of the continent. When around 1800 to 1820
it was clear that Britain was forging ahead, the other advanced parts of
Western Europe sought to first keep in step and then to catch up. The stage was
set for a remarkable period of economic development and industrialization
across the continent.
To
understand whether there was an Industrial Revolution in the whole of Europe,
it is necessary to remember the great variety and variation in the continent as
there were more advanced and more backward countries in Europe which were
significant for tackling industrialization. On one side were countries like
Germany, Belgium and France that were early followers of Britain and
successfully industrialized by 1860-70; on the other were countries like Russia
that started industrializing at the end of the 19th century while Spain hardly
succeeded in industrializing at all before 1914. Countries in the South-East of
Europe were even further behind. Countries like Denmark or the Netherlands had
very advanced agricultural sectors while Belgium concentrated on heavy
industry.
No comments:
Post a Comment