Investigate the changes that took place in Horsforth between 1700 and 1900
Introduction I am going to investigate the changes that took place in Horsforth between 1700 and 1900, and in doing so prove that these changes were because of the Industrial Revolution which took place at that time hence proving my main point that Horsforth, like most villages during that time, changed from an agricultural village to an industrial town. The evidences I will be looking at include buildings of historical value, road names that reflect ideas then, names of pubs which give an idea of the types of activities that went on in Horsforth, the census which could tell us how the population and types of jobs changed during that period. Industrial Revolution First of all we need some basic ideas about the Industrial Revolution itself and how it changed the entire nation: As the 18th century began, an expanding and wealthier population demanded more and better goods. In the productive process, coal came to replace wood. Early-model steam engines were introduced to drain water and raise coal from the mines. The crucial development of the Industrial Revolution was the use of steam for power, and the greatly improved engine (1769) of James Watt marked the high point in this development. Cotton textiles was the key industry early in the Industrial Revolution. John Kay's fly shuttle (1733), James Hargreaves's spinning jenny (patented 1770), Richard Arkwright's water frame
`How important does the coal trade appear to have been in the development of the port of Whitehaven from 1700 until 1900?'
`How important does the coal trade appear to have been in the development of the port of Whitehaven from 1700 until 1900?' To do this part of the assignment I visited Whitehaven harbour to try and find evidence to answer this question. On this visit we went to many different places around the harbour that we thought would have a connection to the coal trade and the harbour. First, we visited the lime tongue, the name tells us that they imported lime for the iron industry and unloaded it on this pier. There is also another pier called the Sugar tongue, the name tells me that they imported sugar and unloaded it onto this pier. From this we can tell that goods were also imported into the port of Whitehaven. I know that from my background knowledge of coal that it would not have been possible to unload the coal onto either of these piers because they are too thin to unload heavy, bulky coal. To support the evidence further of having other exports and imports, we found drawings and inscriptions on benches down the lime tongue. These drawings included coal that we know was exported, tobacco that was imported from Virginia, timber which was imported from North America for the coal industry to be used as pit props and fish were exported. We also found the old Custom House, pictured right, which tells us that goods did come in to the port of Whitehaven and people had to pay custom
Technological Change since 1700
CONTENTS PAGE Page number Contents Page 1 Technological Change Since 1700 2 A. The Steam Engine B. Railroads C. The Steamship 3 D. The History Of Steam Engines I. Communications II. Changing Social Patterns D. Textile Industry 7 E. Time Line Of Industrial Revolution 9 Bibliography 10 Technological Change since 1700 The technological changes of the eighteenth century did not appear suddenly. By the beginning of the eighteenth century in England, the use of machines in manufacturing was already widespread. In 1762 Matthew Boulton built a factory which employed more than six hundred workers, and installed a steam engine to supplement power from two large waterwheels which ran a variety of lathes and polishing and grinding machines. From 1700 on, the Staffordshire potters used waterwheels or windmills to turn machines which ground and mixed their materials. After 1850 machinery was used extensively in the pottery-making process. The price of crockery fell, and eating and drinking consequently became more hygienic. The textile industry had some special problems. It took four spinners to keep up with one cotton loom, and ten persons to prepare yarn for one woolen weaver. Spinners were busy, but weavers often had to be idle for lack of yarn. Weaving could then be done more quickly, but it still was delayed until yarn was available in
When and to what extent was there a military revolution in Europe between 1450 and 1700?
When and to what extent was there a military revolution in Europe between 1450 and 1700? There has been a long-standing debate into whether there was a military revolution during the early modern period, and when such a revolution took place. The New Oxford Dictionary vol. 2 (1976) describes a revolution as, "a complete change or fundamental reconstruction, through forcible substitution by subjects of a new ruler or polity for the old" [1]. From this, it may suggest that, a revolution would be a significant, noticeable change over a short period of time. It would seem appropriate to look at various sources available to answer whether such changes that took place during the period in question could be defined as 'revolutionary'. Geoffrey Parker states "The early modern period has come to be seen as a time of major change in warfare and military organisation, as an era of 'military revolution'" [2]. The concept that a military revolution occurred in the early modern period, specifically in the period 1500-1660, was considered an established part of the curriculum for historians studying the early modern period in Britain. It is based on a published lecture by Michael Roberts, delivered in 1955. This drew essentially on his detailed studies of early 17th century Sweden, and in particular the reign of Gustavus Adolphus (1611-32) and on Sweden's entry in 1630 into the Thirty
French Revolution
French Revolution During the late 1700's, France followed in America's footsteps towards their own revolution. A major shift in power would be seen within the short time period of 1789-1799, and with it a large advancement away from the absolutist government of France. During the late 1700's France was the most powerful estate in the world. The effects of the country's revolution would soon spread from France to the rest of Europe and finally result in a continental war. The French Revolution was based mostly on the Third Estate's desire to obtain liberty and equality. France's social system was set up in such a way that it was only a matter of time before a revolution took place. The economic classes of France were set in three estates. The first estate was the church or clergy, the second estate was the nobles, and the third estate consisted of peasants and the uneducated. France's economic system allowed for the highest taxation of the third estate while the clergy members were exempt from taxes, and the nobles paid little or no taxes at all. People who are starving and can barely afford to survive can only pay so much before they refuse to pay anymore. It is not surprising that the third estate was driven to immediate action with Louis XVI's demand for higher taxes. Ideas of liberty and equality sprang up with the onset of the American Revolution and paved a way for the
How far do you agree that the impetus (momentum, thrust) of science experienced in Europe between 1500 and 1700 was indeed a revolution?
How far do you agree that the impetus (momentum, thrust) of science experienced in Europe between 1500 and 1700 was indeed a revolution? The scientific revolution refers to the period between the 16th to 18th centuries in Europe, during the period of the Renaissance, where there was a large change in the field of science. It was started when many ancient texts were discovered after the fall of Constantinople, and together with the invention of printing, Europe experiences a revitalisation of scientific research. Defining a revolution as a dramatic and fundamental change, I do agree that this impetus of science was in fact a scientific revolution, since there was a significant change in scientists' approach to science, along with the change of fundamental ideas in science. The main reason why the impetus of science can be considered to be a revolution is because of the drastic change in the approach to science, or in the emergence of empiricism, which refers to scientific methodology most widely accepted in the modern context. It is a fundamental shift in the scientific method since prior to this period, the Aristotelian approach to obtaining science was to observe natural phenomena and based on deductive reasoning, form conclusions. It was only during the 16th century, that a scientists and philosopher named Francis Bacon specifically penned the empirical tradition. Thus
The Industrial Revolution
The Industrial Revolution may be defined as the application of power-driven machinery to manufacturing. It had its beginning in remote times, and is still continuing in some places. In the eighteenth century all of western Europe began to industrialize rapidly, but in England the process was most highly accelerated. England's head start may be attributed to the emergence of a number of simultaneous factors. Britain had burned up her magnificent oak forests in its fireplaces, but large deposits of coal were still available for industrial fuel. There was an abundant labor supply to mine coal and iron, and to man the factories. From the old commercial empire there remained a fleet, and England still possessed colonies to furnish raw materials and act as captive markets for manufactured goods. Tobacco merchants of Glasgow and tea merchants of London and Bristol had capital to invest and the technical know-how derived from the Scientific Revolution of the seventeenth century. Last, but not least important, the insularity of England saved industrial development from being interrupted by war. Soon all western Europe was more or less industrialized, and the coming of electricity and cheap steel after 1850 further speeded the process. I. The Agricultural Revolution The English countryside was transformed between 1760 and 1830 as the open-field system of cultivation gave way to
Explain why the agricultural revolution happened.
Edward Phillips 21 September 2002 EXPLAIN WHY THE AGRICULTURAL REVOLUTION HAPPENED The Agricultural Revolution 1750 - 1900 * Background: The population of Great Britain: 750: 1 million people lived in Britain. 80% lived and worked in the countryside. Farming was the most important industry 825: 21 million people lived in Britain. 60% lived and worked in the countryside although industries were growing and a lot of people had moved to the towns. 900: 40 million people lived in Britain. In England alone, 75% people lived in the towns and huge urban areas had developed. During the 1700's and 1800's, the number of people in the towns who could not grow their own food was increasing rapidly, so Britain's farmers needed to grow more food. Whatever they grew or produced, they could sell and they could charge almost whatever they wanted. To make more money and increase their profits, they were keen to produce as much as possible, but they could only do this if the farming methods they were using were improved. During the early 1700's a great change in farming occurred and The Agricultural Revolution began in Britain. Between 1750 and 1870 there was a huge increase in farm output, brought about by three developments:- Improved crop-growing methods Advances in livestock breeding Invention of new farm equipment * Improved crop-growing methods Before this
Was the industrial Revolution a good thing?
Was the industrial Revolution a good thing? The Industrial Revolution was a series of many changes that took place in Great Britain from 1750 to 1900. There is much controversy as to whether the changes were for better or for worse and to whether the Industrial Revolution was a good thing or a bad thing. Some people say that it improved peoples' lives, and that technology and entertainment got better. They say that Britain was made a great, rich and powerful country. Others disagree and say that it was a bad thing and that during the Industrial Revolution there were terrible working and living conditions and many people suffered because of the changes that took place. They also say that it caused a lot of pollution and that it changed many people's lifestyles for the worse. In this essay I will investigate the bad and then the good things that happened to people's lives in Britain between 1750 and 1900 and then make up my own mind as to whether the Industrial Revolution was a good thing or not. In the early 1700's a lot of people worked on the land. Nearly all of the people that didn't work on the farms worked in their homes, spinning or weaving. Most families spun and wove in the same room as they did all of their domestic chores. This room was usually quite full, with the children, adults and even the elderly all helping to produce wool and cloth. This was a good idea,
Industrial and Agricultural Revolution.
Industrial and Agricultural Revolution Contents 1. Introduction 2. What is Revolution? 3. Agricultural Revolution 3.1.Why did it happen? 3.2. Who lost out? 3.3. Who gained? 4. Industrial Revolution 4.1. Why did it happen? 4.2. Who lost out? 4.3. Who gained? 5. Effects of Revolution in Northampton 6. Conclusion . Introduction The objective of this project is to define revolution in a political/social context and to explain in two sections the processes of the Industrial and Agricultural revolutions in England. I have take the opportunity to study the effects of the Industrial revolution in Northampton. This project is written in five main sections. The first will define "revolution". The second section will discuss the Agricultural revolution, providing statistics, and discussing the cause and effect of the Agricultural revolution in England. It will also explain what happened in the Agricultural revolution and what changed, explaining how farming methods changed. The third section will discuss the Industrial revolution and its cause and effects. It will show the effects of factory working on the social structure of English life. The fourth section provides an example of the industrial age in Northampton a town that had made shoes for hundreds of years and how the Industrial revolution effected its shoe making techniques. My conclusion, summarises the project and argues
