‘Proto-industrialisation’ is usually considered to be a phase in the development of modern industrial economies (Hudson, 1990) and possibly created conditions for the establishment of fully industrial societies. It is thus generally the term given to the phase that preceded industrialisation. It is Franklin Mendels, who invented the term and first used it in a dissertation on the Flemish linen industry (Mendels 1969/1981). Mendels arguments were first widely adopted by his peers but then were the object of numerous criticisms.
When first coining this term, Mendels had two basic propositions (Hudson, 1990). First, during the phase of proto-industrialisation, a rural labour force started to participate in domestic industries producing for …show more content…
A process of regional specialisation was thus gradually implemented. Proto-industry was dominated by the process whereby a capitalist merchant distributed raw materials to working families to then take in the processed goods and take care of the finishing and sales. This system was peculiarly present in England and most Europe for the production of cottons, woollens and metal wares.
Moreover, to explain the proto-industrialisation phase, Mendels (1972) noted that proto-industrialisation transformed the family unit and that it had a positive impact on aggregate and per capita output. However, there is evidence that most peasants who became weavers remained at the bottom of the social ladder.
He also noticed the importance of accumulation of capital by entrepreneurs that could build factories and purchase machinery, the acquisition of entrepreneurial skilled and the extension of manufacturing skills. He considered as well that the workers became more and more dependant on employers who controlled raw materials supplies and markets and that this this phase was marked by a significant population growth. This argument was confirmed by Levine (1977) who believed that proto-industrialisation led to population growth. He then added that this process was really important mainly because it allowed to separate rural social structure from land …show more content…
Indeed, the model first introduced by Mendel sparked many criticisms and other definitions of proto-industrialisation that were more or less close to the one, first proposed by Mendels. However, it is safe to say that the concept of proto-industrialisation has played a significant part in the recent historiography of the causes of industrial revolutions and that this concept, even though many times challenged, has been seen as a considerable achievement (Lawrence Stone, 1984). Withal, it is interesting to note that the decline of proto-industry is seen by most theorist as inevitable because “it bore the seeds of its own destruction” (Hudson, 1990), mainly because of the absence of technological change and workers deciding their own rhythm of work. These problems thus “either resulted in the transition to factory manufacture, or forced areas of rural industry to de-industrialise in the face of snore efficient production elsewhere” (Hudson,
When first coining this term, Mendels had two basic propositions (Hudson, 1990). First, during the phase of proto-industrialisation, a rural labour force started to participate in domestic industries producing for …show more content…
A process of regional specialisation was thus gradually implemented. Proto-industry was dominated by the process whereby a capitalist merchant distributed raw materials to working families to then take in the processed goods and take care of the finishing and sales. This system was peculiarly present in England and most Europe for the production of cottons, woollens and metal wares.
Moreover, to explain the proto-industrialisation phase, Mendels (1972) noted that proto-industrialisation transformed the family unit and that it had a positive impact on aggregate and per capita output. However, there is evidence that most peasants who became weavers remained at the bottom of the social ladder.
He also noticed the importance of accumulation of capital by entrepreneurs that could build factories and purchase machinery, the acquisition of entrepreneurial skilled and the extension of manufacturing skills. He considered as well that the workers became more and more dependant on employers who controlled raw materials supplies and markets and that this this phase was marked by a significant population growth. This argument was confirmed by Levine (1977) who believed that proto-industrialisation led to population growth. He then added that this process was really important mainly because it allowed to separate rural social structure from land …show more content…
Indeed, the model first introduced by Mendel sparked many criticisms and other definitions of proto-industrialisation that were more or less close to the one, first proposed by Mendels. However, it is safe to say that the concept of proto-industrialisation has played a significant part in the recent historiography of the causes of industrial revolutions and that this concept, even though many times challenged, has been seen as a considerable achievement (Lawrence Stone, 1984). Withal, it is interesting to note that the decline of proto-industry is seen by most theorist as inevitable because “it bore the seeds of its own destruction” (Hudson, 1990), mainly because of the absence of technological change and workers deciding their own rhythm of work. These problems thus “either resulted in the transition to factory manufacture, or forced areas of rural industry to de-industrialise in the face of snore efficient production elsewhere” (Hudson,