Industrial Revolution

The Industrial Revolution

There have recently been debates about the possibility of Western Europe having developed before the rest of Eurasia. There are numerous opinions and facts about the Industrial Revolution and who revolutionized first.  Great Britain was the first to industrialize, Belgium and later – France followed. To understand the steps of industrializing and economic development, I will introduce arguments from different historians about this subject.

David Landes states that European domination developed due to already existing modernity and cultural values. Europe had a noticeable advantage over Asia in terms of cultural values. Asia had despotism, which was a drawback comparing to Europe. Europe had already used property rights from biblical times and had advances in technology and shipbuilding. These factors were eventually taken advantage of in order to industrialize and improve, while Asian countries did not develop as well due to hostility to change and lack of protection of private property. Landes also admitted that the European development was contrasted with the interruption of Asian technological and intellectual advance.

R. Bin. Wong questions the reasons of Europe developing successfully and China on the other hand - failing. While both experienced economic expansion through 17th and 18th centuries, China at the time was static and economically underdeveloped. The abrupt end of Chinese voyages can be explained with the unjustifiable costs, as Jack Goldstone explains. There was no reason of voyaging that far, because they found nothing more than poor land. Kenneth Pomeranz claims that Europe excelled at technological development but lagged behind in textile weaving. Both were on the edge of ecological exhaustion in the 1750’s, but Europe got ahead because of two factors. It had convenient coalfield locations and could easily use the land of America for necessary resources. With help from the New World, Europe was able to successfully develop and industrialize.

There are, however, some counter-arguments regarding Western Europe being more successful and one step ahead of the East. Gunder A. Frank states that from the 15th to 19th century Asia dominated the economic system in the continent. The key to success could have been that Europe used stolen gold and silver from America to ease the process of developing in the New World. Europe was entirely dependent on metals and, seeing the opportunity to develop, it took advantage. Another reason for development was the low population-to-land-resource ratio of Europe in comparison to Asia, which resulted in higher wages and lower population, thus giving opportunity for more people to work and be wealthy. In addition, Frank regards that there is no contrast of European dynamism and Asian stagnation as there is no evidence.