Why did the Industrial Revolution Start in Britain?

I am attempting to create a rough story line on how one gets the process of Industrialization going, the needed background for it to happen. The only one I can clearly state is the Second Agricultural Revolution. I need help to make it clear.
 
I'm no expert on the Industrial Revolution, but one reason I've heard is political stability. The structured systems that ensured the cost effectiveness of production and distribution would've been impossible in other less stabilized countries.
 
You need money to make money and to take advantage of industrial advances required individual business owners have easy access to investor capital. There has to be enough easy money going around that people can afford to take risks, fail and start over. England had this extremely well sorted out in this period. The legal protection for patents, the stock markets and banks. Everyone with a little money was trying to find get rich quick opportunities. There was appetite and tolerance for boom and bust, leading to failures like the South Seas Bubble, but also success stories.
 
The Agricultural Revolution is one, and is easy to search for. Can anybody give me a link for the literacy rate of Europe for 18th century.
 
A bunch of reasons:
- A constitutional setup that prevented the government taking windfall profits from merchants, due to merchants having critical political power after the Civil War
- A massive surplus of capital from the profits of Agricultural Revolution and clearances of common lands
- Legal innovations brought from the Netherlands in the Glorious Revolution that allowed the limited corporation, central banking and stock exchanges
- Widespread literacy accelerated by the Protestant Reformation
- A centralized political state with no internal tariff barriers and only two legal jurisdictions
- Easily accessible coal and iron deposits in close proximity to each other
- An extensive transport network (via canals and the whole country being close to coastlines) that allowed the transport of resources to factories and end products to markets
- A culture of exploration and innovation caused by the Scientific Revolution and English involvement in naval exploration
- An inheritance culture of primogeniture, encouraging the accumulation of land/capital holding in the eldest son and a vast supply of younger brothers desiring their own wealth
- Unification of the Isles, preventing the need for spending on a large army, and making public funds available for commercial infrastructure
- A highly effective fiscal system, allowing substantial revenue raising where necessity
 
Last edited:
Ok this is what I managed to cobble together. I would appreciate some feedback if it correct.

1. Agricultural Revolution of 18th Century. (The movement of people into cities for work)
2. Political Stability. (The confidence in government protections for all property)
3. Financial Institutions. (The necessary capital and method for financial safeguards)
4. High Literacy. (Higher chance for knowledge of and practical application of scientific principles)
5. Freedom of Movements. (The increase in the movement of goods, ideas and people)
6. Competition. (The necessity for one Empire to be stronger than her rivals)
7. Technological Revolution. (Discovery of Scientific principles)
8. Mercantilism. (To achieve positive trading balance, especially in manufactured goods)


Timeframe is from 1700 to 1800.

Agricultural Revolution
UK 75% growth in output, % of population in agriculture reduced by 40%.

Political Stability
By 1697 the fiscal powers of Parliament were largely in place, that gave credibility to both Monarch and
Parliament not to impune upon each others rights.

Financial Institutions
Founding of the Bank of England 1694, that acted as a middleman for both state and personal use, the use of
banknotes as mediums of exchange, the opening of many other banks, to allow the rapid flow of capital.

High Literacy
UK Literacy rate of 53%.

Freedom of Movements
The largest Empire in the world, with the largest merchant fleet, the booming of canal building to transport
food, materials and people across the UK.

Competition
The land area and population advantage of France, meant that Britain had to seek qualitative or expansive ways
to bridge the gap with their longstanding rival.

Technological Revolution
Important inventions like Seed Drill, Atmospheric Steam Engine, Mercury Thermometer, Sextant, Marine chronometer
Spinning Jenny, Spinning Frame, Electric Telegraph, Steamship, Spinning mule, Steel Roller, Threshing machine
Power Loom, Steamboat, Gas Turbine, Canning, Vaccination for smallpox, Fourdrinier Machine, Carding Machine.

Mercantilism
To be able to flood British markets with raw materials and be able to cheaply export manufactured goods to
undercut Rival Empire, the acquisition of colonies to source raw materials before the rival can.
 
- The Bank of England allowing anyone to invest
- The belief that wealth is not a zero sum environment - it can grow
- Primogeniture - only the eldest is guaranteed the title and an inheritance the remainder have to go out and make a living for themselves. There is then not enough people with titles to fill all administrative positions. Resulting in the need to recruit from the landed gentry, yeomanry etc. There was a greater degree of social mobility than seen on the continent.
- The first modern nation to develop and support an national strategy - the UK is safe as long as no one nation dominates the continent.
 
Last edited:

Thomas1195

Banned
Mercantilism
To be able to flood British markets with raw materials and be able to cheaply export manufactured goods to
undercut Rival Empire, the acquisition of colonies to source raw materials before the rival can.
Congratulation. You have made a good rebuttal towards Adam Smith.
 
Agricultural Revolution
UK 75% growth in output, % of population in agriculture reduced by 40%.

Political Stability
By 1697 the fiscal powers of Parliament were largely in place, that gave credibility to both Monarch and
Parliament not to impune upon each others rights.

Financial Institutions
Founding of the Bank of England 1694, that acted as a middleman for both state and personal use, the use of
banknotes as mediums of exchange, the opening of many other banks, to allow the rapid flow of capital.

High Literacy
UK Literacy rate of 53%.

Freedom of Movements
The largest Empire in the world, with the largest merchant fleet, the booming of canal building to transport
food, materials and people across the UK.

Competition
The land area and population advantage of France, meant that Britain had to seek qualitative or expansive ways
to bridge the gap with their longstanding rival.

Technological Revolution
Important inventions like Seed Drill, Atmospheric Steam Engine, Mercury Thermometer, Sextant, Marine chronometer
Spinning Jenny, Spinning Frame, Electric Telegraph, Steamship, Spinning mule, Steel Roller, Threshing machine
Power Loom, Steamboat, Gas Turbine, Canning, Vaccination for smallpox, Fourdrinier Machine, Carding Machine.

Mercantilism
To be able to flood British markets with raw materials and be able to cheaply export manufactured goods to
undercut Rival Empire, the acquisition of colonies to source raw materials before the rival can.
These are all good points however I do notice that all these factors were also present in the dutch republic as well. I could be wrong, but it would be good anyway to point out what the republic missed here in this list or if there's a point outside the list where there's a difference (lack of coal is not enough of an answer IMO).
 
These are all good points however I do notice that all these factors were also present in the dutch republic as well. I could be wrong, but it would be good anyway to point out what the republic missed here in this list or if there's a point outside the list where there's a difference (lack of coal is not enough of an answer IMO).
Probably stability. At the end of the 18th century the Dutch republic was a rather unstable and corrupt place. And wealth. At the beginning of the 19th century after the French occupation and with the loss of Belgium the Netherlands was a rather poor place. Oh and the lack of coal and steel resources within the border didn't help either.

If the Industrial revolution had happened earlier, in the late 17th century/early 18th century the Dutch Republic probably would have been one pf the focus points. In some ways it was. The innovations using wind power in the Dutch Republic were in many ways a precursor to the industrial revolution.
 
Probably stability. At the end of the 18th century the Dutch republic was a rather unstable and corrupt place. And wealth. At the beginning of the 19th century after the French occupation and with the loss of Belgium the Netherlands was a rather poor place. Oh and the lack of coal and steel resources within the border didn't help either.

If the Industrial revolution had happened earlier, in the late 17th century/early 18th century the Dutch Republic probably would have been one pf the focus points. In some ways it was. The innovations using wind power in the Dutch Republic were in many ways a precursor to the industrial revolution.
Was stability really the factor here? Because in England you can also discern instability f.i. in the form of the ludites. Corruption was certainly not the problem, cause again that was certainly also available in England. The corruption in England however was in favor of the new entrepeneurial class. And that certain corruption in politics is exactly what you need for an industrial take-off. That's how i interpret stability and i see that stability possible in the existing institutions of the Republic (in contrast to f.i. France, where the economical policy was still dependent of the mood of the monarch and this meant that sometimes measures were taken in favor of the citizens, but the next year in favor of the land owning nobility. There was not such a consistent policy as in England or the Republic).

The Republic was certainly not poor in the 18th century, there was plenty of capital. However and here's the really big mistery. The dutch capital in the 18th century was mainly invested abroad and not in enterprises in the Republic. Another factor that may be crucial is in play here.

Peet is in my opinion enough of a power source in the early stages. After that the coal from the Ruhr is easier and faster to get than coal was for an average English industrial centre.
 
Was stability really the factor here? Because in England you can also discern instability f.i. in the form of the ludites. Corruption was certainly not the problem, cause again that was certainly also available in England. The corruption in England however was in favor of the new entrepeneurial class. And that certain corruption in politics is exactly what you need for an industrial take-off. That's how i interpret stability and i see that stability possible in the existing institutions of the Republic (in contrast to f.i. France, where the economical policy was still dependent of the mood of the monarch and this meant that sometimes measures were taken in favor of the citizens, but the next year in favor of the land owning nobility. There was not such a consistent policy as in England or the Republic).

The Republic was certainly not poor in the 18th century, there was plenty of capital. However and here's the really big mistery. The dutch capital in the 18th century was mainly invested abroad and not in enterprises in the Republic. Another factor that may be crucial is in play here.

Peet is in my opinion enough of a power source in the early stages. After that the coal from the Ruhr is easier and faster to get than coal was for an average English industrial centre.
Now that I thought a bit about it, I think another problem with the Dutch Republic was stagnation. The Dutch Republic was incredibly innovative in the 17th entury. This changed somewhere in the 18th century and the Dutch republic, its economy, its politics, posibly even its culture, stagnated.
 
These are all good points however I do notice that all these factors were also present in the dutch republic as well. I could be wrong, but it would be good anyway to point out what the republic missed here in this list or if there's a point outside the list where there's a difference (lack of coal is not enough of an answer IMO).

Lack of iron and coal is a very good reason. There was a reason why Belgium became the number 2 place to industrialize after Britain. The other reason is that the place was regularly at threat of invasion or actually being invaded, by the Prussians and the French, in the critical time period. Also the province system prevented a unified jurisdiction with common standards and legal codes in the time period. They also lacked the internal scale of the British market.
 
Was stability really the factor here? Because in England you can also discern instability f.i. in the form of the ludites. Corruption was certainly not the problem, cause again that was certainly also available in England. The corruption in England however was in favor of the new entrepeneurial class. And that certain corruption in politics is exactly what you need for an industrial take-off. That's how i interpret stability and i see that stability possible in the existing institutions of the Republic (in contrast to f.i. France, where the economical policy was still dependent of the mood of the monarch and this meant that sometimes measures were taken in favor of the citizens, but the next year in favor of the land owning nobility. There was not such a consistent policy as in England or the Republic).

The Republic was certainly not poor in the 18th century, there was plenty of capital. However and here's the really big mistery. The dutch capital in the 18th century was mainly invested abroad and not in enterprises in the Republic. Another factor that may be crucial is in play here.

Peet is in my opinion enough of a power source in the early stages. After that the coal from the Ruhr is easier and faster to get than coal was for an average English industrial centre.

The Luddites happened more than a century earlier.
 
I was often under the impression that part of it was that Britain was typically free of many of the issues that plagued much of continental Europe during the early 1800s. Mainly the issues of territory.
 
@Socrates mentioned this earlier, but if memory serves one of the biggest reasons is because coal was one of the few natural resources that Britain in absolute excess and industrialization was basically the only way they could really capitalize on that
 

Thomas1195

Banned
Was stability really the factor here? Because in England you can also discern instability f.i. in the form of the ludites. Corruption was certainly not the problem, cause again that was certainly also available in England. The corruption in England however was in favor of the new entrepeneurial class.
Corruption and the overall public finance system in the Dutch Republic favoured the rentier class who held investments in public debt bonds and in foreign ventures. If we butterfly away the Glorious Revolution and have the Tories firmly in charge then such corruption would favour the landed aristocrats.

The Republic was certainly not poor in the 18th century, there was plenty of capital. However and here's the really big mistery. The dutch capital in the 18th century was mainly invested abroad and not in enterprises in the Republic. Another factor that may be crucial is in play here.
Dutch internal market was too small (unlike in Britain) to provide sustained profitable investment opportunities in domestic industries and protectionist policies abroad damaged their export business. This was further worsen by high wage. Britain also faced rising wage issue at that time, however unlike the Brits, the Dutch did not have or lost (they lost several wars at late 17th and early 18th century) firm grip/control over large and populous colonies to serve as markets to sustain growth (like losing access to Spanish colonies to Britain following Peace of Utrecht for example).
 
Top