Article Review of De Vries' The Industrial Revolution and the Industrious Revolution
Danny McHugh – 11025132 Making History Assignment 2 Article Review ‘The Industrial Revolution and the Industrious Revolution’ In his article, titled ‘The Industrial Revolution and the Industrious Revolution’, De Vries assess how the idea of Industrious Revolution accumulated into the large scale Industrial Revolution that is so greatly speculated and researched by modern historians. He mildly gives thought to a pre-researched ‘protoindustrialization’ that many historians see as an ‘idea too many[1]’. Yet through his article he asses the possibility for regional economic and agricultural development to be causes of Industrial Revolution, rather than the products of it. De Vries looks at the the ‘new industrious household’[2] and the evolution of a modern market for households. The idea of an industrious revolution, according to De Vries, was an influx of consumerism. He evaluates the idea that supply and demand became intertwined as the birth of a new consumerism sprouted Industrial Revolution. If we read further into De Vries work, we find ‘The industrious revolution: consumer behaviour and the household economy, 1650 to the present’ which enters into the idea that ‘the rise of industriousness, [is] defined as a combination of long hours of market work for adult males, and wide-spread participation in the labor market by women and
The hierarchical society that was present in the American South was deeply rooted in white supremacy, although as I will explore, masters never achieved the total domination that they sought over their slaves.
Lorcán Kerr, 40028117 Southern distinctiveness was a feature of antebellum life that was sustained by the plantation economy, but there were other significant elements that contributed to a separate and distinct southern identity. The term ‘peculiar institution’ has become something of a euphemism for slavery in the antebellum south. This description describes the protection of slaves by their slave owners but restricting their freedom or any autonomy they sought. The booming cotton industry and the white masters being hugely anti-modern defined this era in American history. Any threat to the master or the social hierarchy was stamped out and autonomy to an extent was only a luxury for some slave plantations. The hierarchical society that was present in the American South was deeply rooted in white supremacy, although as I will explore, masters never achieved the total domination that they sought over their slaves. Most importantly to note, slave life was influenced by but not controlled by rigidly held plans and regimes of their slaveholder. Slaves during this era enjoyed a semi-autonomous way of life, as Peter Kolchin describes away from the toiling in the fields from sunrise to sunset they, ‘lived in a world largely unknown to their masters’[1]. The matriarchy that existed in the slave quarters, as men spent all day toiling in the fields, the distinct religion
