Rehabilitating the industrial revolution

TLDR

The prevailing gradualist narrative in economic and social histories of the industrial revolution portrays it as a continuity with the past, downplaying its unique economic and social transformations. This article seeks to contest that gradualist view by foregrounding the industrial revolution’s technological innovations, the employment of female and child labor, regional specialization, demographic shifts, and political changes. The authors highlight these dimensions—technological change, female and child labor use, regional specialization, demographic behavior, and political shifts—as key mechanisms of transformation.

Abstract

Rehabilitating the industrial revolution. Gradualist perspectives now dominate economic and social histories of the industrial revolution. Analyses of economic change which rely on growth accounting and macroeconomic estimates of productivity indicate continuity with the past; social historians have followed in turning aside from the analysis of new class formations. This article challenges these perspectives. Currently accepted economic indicators and recent social history underplay the extent and uniqueness of economic and social transformation. The article emphasizes change in technology, the use of a female and child labour force, regional specialization, demographic behaviour, and political change.