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.
Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 151 citations exist upstream.
Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.