This research has been made by me and cannot be shared anywhere without reference. Permissions of all the quotations in this article have been obtained and the images used are suitable for re-licensing. I will share parts of this holistic and in-depth research over time. I hope that it will attract your attention and read with pleasure.
CREATION TIME AND SPACE DETECTION
The concentration points of the discussions on the Industrial Revolution in the history of economy are gathered together in determining the time of the revolution, the basic sector where industrialization started, the growth stages leading to industrialization and the place where the revolution reached its peak.
The first divergence in the historical positioning stage stands out as "evolutionists" and "revolutionaries". Evolutionists view this process as the final result of economic evolution; “Revolutionaries” see it as a transformational milestone in starting a new era in British economic history.
The second conflict is related to the internal dynamics of the revolution. Whether any industry led the revolution; It was the focus of these discussions whether it spread holistically or regionally from part to whole. The third topic of discussion is; There have been stages of development of the revolution, which are scrutinized within the structural image of the revolution. At this point, Rostow's theoretical approaches shed light on the discussions.
Another problematic was the relation between space and revolution within environmental factors. Where exactly should the revolution be positioned as its starting point? Was Britain's pioneering coincidence or did the revolution process have to sprout in Britain due to environmental factors?
The Industrial Revolution, accompanied by these discussions, has shown the effect of many inventions and the methods developed accordingly, especially in the textile sector, and the developments in the use of iron and steel in the transportation sector, and the production methods covering the first half of the 1800s in England from the end of the 1700s, It was defined as the process that results in a qualitative and quantitative increase in capacity.
However, this definition and historical positioning did not end the differences of opinion. Toynbee argued that industrialization was completed at the end of the first half of the 19th century with the process of change created by the technical-technological developments in the whole concept of industry in Britain from 1750 on. His view has been highly criticized by historical circles. Defending that the industrial revolution process was limited to the textile and iron industry, which was the first to show itself, J.H. Clapham claimed that it was possible to spread the results to other sectors since 1860 and that the process was not completed before these dates.
Another negative criticism came from J.Nef with his theory of chronological continuity. Nef argued that these great changes experienced at the macro level should be based on the 15th and 16th centuries in the orthoctic plane, and that the developments with the Renaissance cannot be separated from their historical roots.
In current discussions and academic researches, although the positioning of the Industrial Revolution in history, the economic development coefficient and the statistical data obtained from the visible increase in foreign trade, which indicates the germination of the seeds of globalization, the theory accepted as the traditional view; It is the view that Rostow points to the period between 1783-1802, when industrialization was the most intense. Rostow, who has similar views to Toynbee, provides this approach as follows: “In an economy, there is a difference between the smooth economic progress that can be seen even before a real self-supporting path of development is embarked on and what we call action. For example, let's consider the British economic development between 1750-1783, the development in Russia between 1861-1890, and the economic development in Canada between 1868-1890. There is an extremely important, even definite development in such periods ... But although these pre-development phases are essential for later development, the scale and speed of these changes are not sufficient to radically change the economy or in some cases to increase the per capita income by surpassing the population growth. "
Those who are cautious about the fact that the revolution did not happen suddenly compare it to the revolutions that created similar breaking points in world history (such as the people's struggle for freedom in France in 1789 or the World War I in 1914) and the Industrial Revolution was Hegel's dialectical. They define it as a process that progresses gradually within the framework of cause-effect relationship in the system. This view argues that the Industrial Revolution transformed specific lines of business and production networks and developed from part to whole rather than deduction.
As a result, when talking about the Industrial Revolution, it is necessary to examine the revolution with all its details and dynamics rather than being stuck to the word "industry". A historical process that has caused such radical changes in the life of modern societies should not only be examined economically, but also sociologically, together with its ongoing effects.
After the Industrial Revolution is defined chronologically; as long as; Another important factor of time-formation space, which should be viewed from the perspective of spatiality. Looking from this window; Due to the textile industry constituting the biggest share of the UK economy in the mentioned years; The Industrial Revolution seems prone to identify with England.
It is obvious that Britain's guiding position to other countries, especially during the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, cannot be explained solely by being the most developed production network of the textile industry. The strength of the naval forces of the army is capable of far surpassing the navies of other countries; As a result of the geographical discoveries carried out in the mentioned century, the slave population with market, resource and labor power was able to increase more than other European countries with which it was associated, and it could easily switch to a commercial structure in the society by meeting the needs of the local market.
According to Marx, the catalyst of this urban noble revolution in England, which started to pass into industrial society with the increase of its economic capacity, is trade. Regarding this system that was gradually being established, Marx said: "The machine, which is the starting point of the Industrial Revolution, replaces the worker using a single tool by a mechanism that drives many similar tools and is driven by a single driving force, whatever the form of its power." Here we have a machine now. But this is only a simple element of mechanized production. " Only three years after the people-based freedom struggle in France in 1789, Liverpool, one of the most important port cities of England, has 132 slave ships alone and England continues the slave trade at full speed. In this mechanization process, using the gains from geographical discoveries as resources to meet the needs of their own lands; It has created time for technical technological developments and reduced the severity of social breaks by suspending the changes in the fundamental social, economic production and communication styles to be experienced.
