Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A flurry of new studies identifies causes of the Industrial Revolution

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 152 posts

Re: A flurry of new studies identifies causes of the Industrial Revolution

#81

Post by alehlopeh »

scythe wrote: post #57
pffft8888 wrote: post #3

Huge catalyst: massive colonialist profits from India (est. $1 trillion), Africa and later on the Middle East (oil, prior to nationalization)

The Industrial Revolution started in the mid-18th century in England. The steam engine was introduced before the Seven Years' War (1756-63), where England and its allies won and the former essentially became the sole European power in India, though it still only controlled a small fraction of the territory. The Industrial Revolution was well underway before the Anglo-Mysore and Anglo-Maratha wars where England gained…

It doesn’t sound like those rockets helped very much as that song only exists because the British failed to take Baltimore.

Re: A flurry of new studies identifies causes of the Industrial Revolution

#82

Post by pffft8888 »

rayiner wrote: post #40

Understanding the development of Western Europe is one of the most important things historians could be doing right now. Because those lessons can be applied to help developing nations follow the same trajectory to development. Unfortunately too much of academia is fixated on faulting the west for past injustices, which leads to an unproductive Eurocentric mindset. (Britain will never, and cannot, pay back India what…

Not Britain itself, but the Rothschilds or whomever (I have no idea) became obscenely wealthy as a result of it. Those can pay back India.

Re: A flurry of new studies identifies causes of the Industrial Revolution

#83

Post by kitd »

Archelaos wrote: post #35
perrygeo wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. We have plenty of examples of past civilizations experiencing similar economic conditions, slavery, etc. So why didn't e.g. the Romans have an industrial revolution of this scale? Coal (and exploitation of fossil fuels more generally) is the singular factor that differentiates the industrial revolution from everything before it.

Bret C. Devereaux's wrote a very interesting article on this topic in his blog. See: https://acoup.blog/2022/08/26/collections-why-no-roman-indus... His central observation is that the Industrial Revolution involves "coal, steam engines, textile manufacture and above all the harnessing of a new source of energy in the economy", but that "each innovation in the chain required not merely the discovery of the principle,…

This is a good argument. I would only add one thing to it: a scientific understanding of the principles behind the new technologies makes major step changes in mechanised capabilities possible ("paradigm shifts" urgh), and probably explains why the Industrial revolution didn't happen in Greece or Rome.

It's those major step changes that open up the doors to unforeseen opportunities and make previously unviable businesses economically possible.

Re: A flurry of new studies identifies causes of the Industrial Revolution

#84

Post by vixen99 »

sinuhe69 wrote: post #18
perrygeo wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. We have plenty of examples of past civilizations experiencing similar economic conditions, slavery, etc. So why didn't e.g. the Romans have an industrial revolution of this scale? Coal (and exploitation of fossil fuels more generally) is the singular factor that differentiates the industrial revolution from everything before it.

Industrial Revolution of course requires industrial machines. So as long as the machines are not invented, no revolution can start.

https://sciencesensei.com/40-ancient-greek-technology-and-co...

Re: A flurry of new studies identifies causes of the Industrial Revolution

#85

Post by Retric »

shafyy wrote: post #67
Retric wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really, the first steam engine was used in 1606 to drain a coal mine in Spain but they didn’t catch on til the early 1700’s. England really industrialized via multiple waves transitioning cottage industry and water power driving drop hammers and other equipment to ever more industrial factories. It’s a surprisingly smooth transition where individual inventions like the spinning wheel just keep compounding and dri…

According to Wikipedia, steam engines did go "mainstream" with the coal mine use case, at least to an important part: The first commercially successful engine that could transmit continuous power to a machine was the atmospheric engine, invented by Thomas Newcomen around 1712. It improved on Savery's steam pump, using a piston as proposed by Papin. Newcomen's engine was relatively inefficient, and mostly used for pum…

The industrial revolution is generally considered to have started around 1760. That’s 50 years after adoption of the Thomas Newcomen steam engine and 150 years after steam engines where in use.

This shows it wasn’t specifically the steam engine that kicked things off, but rather a wide range of factors which eventually caused people to say something different was going on. The stated start of the industrial revolution is really quite arbitrary, but linking it to the seam engine is really a misunderstanding what was going on.

If you want to point to a single invention Benjamin Huntsman developing the crucible technique for steel production in 1740 had a larger impact on the early years of the first industrial revolution. But again it wasn’t any single invention the transition was simply continuous.

Re: A flurry of new studies identifies causes of the Industrial Revolution

#86

Post by [deleted] »

julianeon wrote: post #56
whatshisface wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My recollection was that things kicked off with the first mechanized mills, locating along streams which used hydraulic or steam power for their energy. That goes back to 3BC where the ancient greeks invented it, so I don't think that's a good candidate for the beginning of the industrial revolution. I get the association though, because it is a mechanical system harnessing non-animal power to do useful work. https…

No, that's true. But to add detail, this is how things kicked off in America particularly, in the late 1700s or early 1800's. The first American mills that could mass produce stuff were located along streams that used the turning of the waterwheels to do their work. This comes from the book Behemoth: The History of the Factory by Freeman (edit: added this later). One of the main characters is a man named Richard Arkw…

[deleted]

Re: A flurry of new studies identifies causes of the Industrial Revolution

#87

Post by jldugger »

thworp wrote: post #78
Thermosetty wrote: post #64

Chattel slavery not only fueled the industrial revolution but laid the foundation for our modern world. Capital accumulation, investment of capital, private ownership of the means of production (people), high levels of wage (free) labor and efficient (non-paid) use of the factors of production (people) - are all mechanisms of capitalism that reach their maximum potential under the conditions of chattel slavery.

Yes, what a great point! This is why Mauritania had all of the world's richest men until 1981 when they outlawed slavery. If they hadn't done that Bezos and Musk would have nothing on the founders of Mauritanian SlaveTrade Corporation. Similarly it's why southern plantation owners where by far the richest people in America until the civil war. Carnegie and Vanderbilt had nothing on them. Strange though that nobody kn…

> Strange though that nobody knows their names, must be censored by the Neo-Confederacy.

Wikipedia has a small list for your perusal[1]. Several actually[2][3][4][5].

    [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_at_American_colleges_an d_universities#Columbia_University
    [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_presidents_of_the_United_States_who_owned_slaves
    [3]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_vice_presidents_of_the_United_States_who_owned_slaves
    [4]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_members_of_the_United_States_Congress_who_owned_slaves
    [5]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:First_Families_of_Virginia

Re: A flurry of new studies identifies causes of the Industrial Revolution

#88

Post by vixen99 »

pdm55 wrote: post #24

Can it be argued that the cause of the Industrial Revolution was man's insatiable appetite for using our planet's resources? A recurring theme in our history! Great Britain was an island. By about 1500, its residents had denuded most of its forests for fuel for cooking and heating. So, they turned to using coal. This spurred the need to pump water out of coal mines. The Industrial Revolution represents the uses of th…

This 'recurring theme' is common to every single organism on Earth. It's only capability that limits life forms other than mankind. It was man's insatiable appetite for survival that got factory workers into the 'dark satanic mills' described by William Blake. Awful conditions there indeed (in many cases) but they worked there in preference to starving to death in the fields. As you point out, they had used up natural energy resources (food & heating) and had no alternative.

Re: A flurry of new studies identifies causes of the Industrial Revolution

#89

Post by qikInNdOutReply »

julianeon wrote: post #49
BirAdam wrote: post #12

As far as I know, the Industrial Revolution started with coal mining. As shafts got deeper there was a need to pump in water and air, and then to lift product out. These steam engines at the site could run on low quality coal allowing all of the good stuff to be sold. The Industrial Revolution really started with these mines in the UK. As regards slavery and other factors, once the steam engines were invented and beg…

> As far as I know, the Industrial Revolution started with coal mining. I don't think that's correct. If you are looking for a one-sentence "how did the Industrial Revolution start" summary, I wouldn't use this. My recollection was that things kicked off with the first mechanized mills, locating along streams which used hydraulic or steam power for their energy. EDIT: The book describing this is called Behemoth: The…

The romans had industrial scale water driven mills. But what you need to keep the running, when one emperor falls and another kingdom falters, is a empowered citizen ship with venture capital, that is out of reach of the king, making innovation resilient.

For me the industrial revolution started with the "familys" taking hold in the netherlands, england, germany - backing ventures, banking, becoming a powerhouse outside of the hierarchical power houses of olden times (king, serf) and not relying on militias, but lawyers, contracts and sometimes even rule of law (free cities).

Its the end of hierarchical anarchy (and yes, rome in some ways was just as anarchic if you fell out of grace with the emperor)..

Re: A flurry of new studies identifies causes of the Industrial Revolution

#90

Post by bryanrasmussen »

BirAdam wrote: post #12

As far as I know, the Industrial Revolution started with coal mining. As shafts got deeper there was a need to pump in water and air, and then to lift product out. These steam engines at the site could run on low quality coal allowing all of the good stuff to be sold. The Industrial Revolution really started with these mines in the UK. As regards slavery and other factors, once the steam engines were invented and beg…

>In the USA, slavery hung around longer than it did in Europe largely due to reward for the capture of runaways provided by government, as well as a late start to industrialization.

The story I was always told was that Eli Whitney's cotton gin made slavery economically viable for longer than it would have otherwise.

Post reply on HN