National and Global Impacts – Strategic Objectives

British cotton manufacture expanded greatly from the mid-18th century, with cotton becoming Britain’s leading textile by the early 1800s and a key driver of wider industrialisation.¹ The industry was fed by raw cotton from around the world, including the Ottoman Empire, West Indian colonies, Brazil, the southern states of America and, in the wake of the American Civil War, India.² By the 1790s, British cotton goods had substantially replaced those produced in India for the British market, and were challenging Indian cottons as barter goods for African slaves (although India remained the leading cotton textile producer). Many more products were sent to the British colonies and the wider Americas, playing an important role in Atlantic plantation economies.³ Yet, despite wide scholarship, only limited attention has been paid to the global context of Derwent Valley cotton goods. European colonisation, the slave trade and associated global trading systems, increasingly identified as important drivers of the Industrial Revolution, are rarely explicitly linked to early centres of textile production.⁴

Previous research has highlighted the spread overseas of technological developments from the Derwent Valley,⁵ but there has been little focus on these innovations as drivers of the Atlantic slave trade and instigators of New World cotton plantation systems or, conversely, on the implications of plantation-based innovations (such as Whitney’s cotton gin of 1793) for developments in the Valley. Furthermore, the technological changes pioneered in the Derwent Valley need further evaluation vis-à-vis other institutional and political drivers for change, particularly in relation to impacts on established cotton textile industries in the Indian subcontinent.⁶ The international sourcing of supplies of raw cotton for the Derwent Valley mills has long been recognised,⁷ but only recently has it been linked explicitly to the expansion of European empires and to the Atlantic slave trade (notably in the Global Cotton Connections Project).⁸ The picture regarding global markets for Derwent Valley cotton goods is much less clear and warrants further research, as do the personal attitudes of leading industrialists of the Valley towards slavery. There is clear potential, therefore, for further examination of the records of Derwent Valley cotton manufacturers from these global perspectives. The Global Cotton Connections project⁹ provides some insights into how this might be achieved by drawing on recent studies of Liverpool and London merchant networks, wider narratives of global capitalism and slavery and online resources such as the Transatlantic Slave Trade and Legacies of British Slave-ownership databases.¹⁰

Susanne Seymour and Sheryllynne Haggerty

Fig.4.56 Picking cotton on a Georgia plantation: drawing in Ballou’s Pictorial 14, 1858, 49; reproduced by courtesy of the Library of Congress (LC-USZ62-76385)

References

¹ Riello, G 2013 Cotton: The Fabric that Made the Modern World. Cambridge: CUP, 212–4

² Riello 2013, chapter 5; Beckert, S 2014 Empire of Cotton: A New History of Global Capitalism. London: Allen Lane, 41–2, 88–94; Beckert, S 2004 ‘Emancipation and Empire: Reconstructing the world-wide web of cotton production in the age of the American Civil War’. American Historical Review 109, 5, 1405–38

³ Beckert 2014, 74–6; Riello 2013, chapter 7

⁴ Inikori, J 2002 Africans and the Industrial Revolution in England. Cambridge: CUP

⁵ Fitton, R S and Wadsworth A P 1958 The Strutts and the Arkwrights. Manchester: MUP; Fitton, R S 1989 The Arkwrights: Spinners of Fortune. Manchester: MUP; Harris J R 1998 Industrial Espionage and Technology Transfer in the Eighteenth Century. Aldershot: Ashgate; Jeremy D J 1981 Transatlantic Industrial Revolution. Oxford: Blackwell

⁶ Riello 2013, chapter 10

⁷ Fitton and Wadsworth 1958; Lindsay, J 1960 ‘An early industrial community: The Evans’ cotton mill at Darley Abbey, Derbyshire, 1783–1810’. Business History Review 34, 277–301

⁸ Seymour, S et al 2015 ‘The global connections of cotton in the Derwent Valley mills in the later 18th and early 19th centuries’ in Wrigley, C (ed) The Industrial Revolution. Cromford: Arkwright Society, 150–70

⁹ https://globalcottonconnections.wordpress.com/

¹⁰ Haggerty, S 2012 Merely for Money? Business Culture in the British Atlantic. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press; Beckert 2014; http://www.ucl.ac.uk/lbs; http://www.slavevoyages.org/

Innovations in the Derwent Valley in the factory production of silk and then cotton, followed at a later date by the adaptation of Arkwright’s inventions for the worsted and flax industries,¹ contributed significantly to the spectacular growth of textile production in Britain during the 18th and 19th centuries. Contemporaries saw the achievements of textile pioneers such as Arkwright in much the same light as the innovations of James Watt in steam technology and Josiah Wedgwood in pottery manufacture, and as more than making up for the economic loss of the American colonies in the 1770s.² The Derwent’s pre-eminence was relatively short-lived, dwindling from the late 18th century as patents were lost and as the early technical innovations were made redundant by later technologies such as steam power, the spinning mule and the power loom.³  However, before the shift northwards in the focus of textile production, the industrial innovations in this short stretch of valley had wide repercussions in many other sectors of the British economy, including shipping, ports, inland transport, chemical engineering, building, banking, finance and insurance.⁴ The loss of Arkwright’s patents in 1785 was a major turning point, spurring a ‘cotton rush’ leading to over 200 similar mills in Britain by 1788.⁵ The importation of new technology was seen by entrepreneurs as the key to emulating the Valley’s success, but to what extent the socio-cultural aspects of the Derwent’s factory system were emulated, and how a narrow focus upon technological innovation might have impacted on the success or failure of these new concerns, are major issues for further research.

Despite legal prohibitions from 1774 until well into the 19th century on the export of ‘tools and utensils’ associated with the cotton and linen trades, Arkwright’s inventions found their way to France, Belgium, Germany and Austria, and to New England via Derwent Valley textile workers Samuel Slater and Thomas Marshall.⁶ The Derwent’s mill owners advertised for skilled workers to manufacture and maintain the machinery, but it would be interesting to know how many of those who were attracted to the Valley stayed to enjoy stable employment or were enticed, like Slater and Marshall, to sell their skills elsewhere.⁷ The Derwent Valley also developed new types and standards of workers’ housing. How widely were these copied in and beyond Britain, and was their quality due, at least in part, to the need to compete with industrial cities that had no need to publicise their employment opportunities?⁸ Finally, where did the money go? The Arkwrights, Strutts and the Evans family made fortunes, and within two generations had become landed gentry, peers and financiers. How influential were later generations of the textile pioneers’ families in the decline of Britain’s industrial spirit during the later 19th and 20th centuries?⁹

 Mark Suggitt

Fig.4.57 Detail of Joseph Wright’s portrait of 1789–90, showing Sir Richard Arkwright seated beside a model of his water frame: the invention enabling the first continuous spinning process requiring machine minders rather than skilled operators and the foundation of his entrepreneurial success (from private collection, by courtesy of Derby Museums Trust)

References

¹ Chapman, S D 1977 The Cotton Industry in the Industrial Revolution. London: Macmillan, 66–7; Rimmer, W 1960 Marshalls of Leeds. Cambridge: CUP

² Briggs, A 1979 Iron Bridge to Crystal Palace: Impact and Images of the Industrial Revolution. London. Thames and Hudson, 38

³ Palmer, M et al 2012 Industrial Archaeology: A Handbook. York: CBA, 186–99

⁴ Chapman 1977, 66

⁵ DVMP  2011 The Derwent Valley Mills and their Communities. Matlock: DVMP, 16

⁶ DVMP 2011, 18–19; Everitt, G et al 2006 Samuel Slater: Hero or Traitor? Milford: Maypole

⁷ Harris, J R 1998 Industrial Espionage and Technology Transfer: Britain and France in the Eighteenth Century. Aldershot: Ashgate

⁸ Fox, C 2011 The Arts of Industry in the Age of Enlightenment. New Haven and London: YUP, 5–9

⁹ Weiner, M 1985 English Culture and the Decline of the Industrial Spirit 1850–1950. London: Pelican, 127–54

The industrial developments that reshaped the British economy during the 18th century can be seen as entrepreneurial responses to rising wealth, growing population, changing consumer tastes and expanding markets. Imported luxury goods such as coffee, tea, tobacco and sugar,¹ along with products such as Chinese porcelain and Indian cottons,² fundamentally changed patterns of consumption in the home market; this in turn guided and spurred further industrial investment. Arkwright’s inventions³ and his factory system extended across Europe and to the eastern seaboard of North America, allowing large-scale mechanised production of cheap clothing and household textiles. The factory production of yarn, followed by mechanised weaving, led to cotton becoming the world’s most important textile for over a century. Spiralling demand stimulated the large-scale cultivation of cotton plants, particularly in the Americas and the Indian sub-continent, while later inventions such as the sewing machine helped to maintain the dominant position of cotton in the market.⁴

Industrialisation and urbanisation transformed British society and politics in the 19th century. Industrial and military power supported the growth of the British Empire, its cotton industry fuelled the development of the plantation system and the exploitation of slave labour in the Americas,⁵ and the ‘shock cities’ of the 1830s⁶ produced some of the worst excesses of poverty and exploitation. The debate on whether industrialisation had a positive or a ‘disastrous and terrible’⁷ impact upon British society continues. What it meant for working people of the time remains, in Griffin’s words, ‘a question of innate human interest…[and]…one of enduring relevance in our own times as other parts of the globe industrialise at a galloping pace’.⁸ The Derwent Valley mill owners were, by the standards of their time, patriarchal but fair. Questions remain, however, regarding their awareness of the broader implications of the enterprises that they managed – particularly with respect to the slave-based production systems that underpinned their cotton supplies. The Strutts, for example, worked with slave traders as well as merchants who opposed enslavement, but in their private and public lives family members criticised the slave economy. There is scope, therefore, for further archive work to unravel the views and practices of the industrialists on this subject.⁹ There is also an opportunity for a review of modifications of the factory system as it spread across the world and, building upon this, the extent to which the system developed by Arkwright and his peers to manage the workforce and maximise productivity¹⁰ should be held responsible for shifts in culture and society beyond the Valley.

^{Mark Suggitt}

Fig.4.58 Origins of the Strutts’ raw cotton supplies, 1793–1798, based on cotton weight data in a Derbyshire Record Office cotton ledger (DRO D6948/2/5; Seymour et al 2015, 156–63; provided by courtesy of Lowri Jones and Susanne Seymour)

References

¹ Walvin, J 1992 Black Ivory: A History of British Slavery. London: Harper Collins, 3–10

² Chapman, S D 1977 The Cotton Industry in the Industrial Revolution. London: Macmillan, 62–72

³ DVMP 2011 The Derwent Valley Mills and their Communities. Matlock: DVMP, 84–5

⁴ Ginsburg, M 1984 Four Hundred Years of Fashion. London: Collins, 37–40

⁵ Fryer, P 1992 Staying Power: The History of Black People in Britain. London: Pluto Press, 33–44

⁶ Marcus, S 1973 ‘Reading the illegible’ in Dyos, H J and Wolff, M (eds)The Victorian City: Images and Realities, Vol. 2. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 257–76; Hunt, T 2004 Building Jerusalem: The Rise and Fall of the Victorian City. London: Weidenfeld & Nicholson, 11–34

⁷ Toynbee, A 1884 Lectures on the Industrial Revolution in England. London. Longman, 84

⁸ Griffin, E 2013 Liberty’s Dawn: A People’s History of the Industrial Revolution. London: YUP, 4

⁹ Seymour, S et al 2015 ‘The global connections of cotton in the Derwent Valley mills in the later 18th and early 19th centuries’ in Wrigley, C (ed) The Industrial Revolution. Cromford: Arkwright Society, 150–70

¹⁰ Fitton, R S and Wadsworth, A P 1958 The Strutts and the Arkwrights. Manchester: MUP, 224–60; Oakes, M J 2011 A Window on John Smedley’s World. Bakewell: Country Books, 43–58

We have considered in Objective 8D the Valley’s hydropower potential, and focus here upon the wider lessons that may be learned from the low-carbon industrial economy that developed in the region during the 18th century. The first factories were driven wholly by waterpower, and the communities that they supported provide exemplars of low-carbon usage that may serve as models for the development of future energy strategies.¹ The hydrological properties of the Valley and its long history of harnessing water power provide an invaluable opportunity to research low-carbon systems that work with, rather than against, the local environment. The region already hosts several well-connected organisations concerned with promoting the technological skills required to face the challenges of future energy needs. These include Transition Belper,² which aims to reduce electricity generation and use, and is monitoring the impact of current changes in use upon carbon dioxide emissions in the area. Installations at Masson Mills, Belper³ and Milford, owned and run by Derwent Hydro Ltd, illustrate how hydropower can work profitably while safeguarding the landscape and environment. Transition Belper members have also established the Amber and Derwent Valley Community Energy Company;⁴ this seeks to develop collaborative approaches to hydropower production and to advance education and awareness by community engagement.

It is imperative that work continues on the development of technologically advanced factories and research laboratories that acknowledge and actively use the Valley’s historically significant setting as a catalyst for energy change. There is huge potential to bring different groups together and to promote initiatives beyond the region. Recent work on place attachment and community engagement offers a vital pathway for promoting changes that are sensitive to the nature and meanings of local environments.⁵ There are also technical requirements associated with harnessing hydroelectricity, including head drop and water flow, while variations in the riverine environment require different types of turbine.⁶ Experience gained from testing in this region can thus contribute usefully to studies of other locations in the UK and beyond. In addition, there are opportunities to learn how the early industrial communities were able to feed their growing populations, enhancing understanding of key elements of low-carbon food production and links between industry and agriculture. Study of food products and production methods, notably of the Strutts’ model farms,⁷ can improve understanding of nutrition, seasonality and output per hectare. A rigorous and ambitious feasibility study for the creation of a low-carbon region could thus contribute significantly to sustainable energy debates⁸ and, as shown by the Stories of Change project,⁹ may provide inspiration for others. Participants in the Future Works¹⁰ strand of that project, which focused upon the Derwent, found this a powerful context for the study of energy challenges, precisely because of its historical significance.

Ian Jackson, Joe Smith, Renata Tyszczuk, Julia Udall and Nicola Whyte

Fig.4.59 View of water turbine in the demolished Milford Mill, dated 1907 (Ó Derbyshire Record Office: D3638-59) 

References

¹ Bellaby, P et al 2010 ‘Towards sustainable energy: Are there lessons from the history of the early factory system?’. Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research 23, 333-48

² http://www.transitionbelper.org

³ http://www.massonmills.co.uk/Green-Energy/

⁴ http://www.transitionbelper.org/advyce.html

⁵ Devine-Wright, P 2009 ‘Rethinking NIMBYism: The role of place attachment and place identity in explaining place-protective action’. Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology 19, 426–41

^6,7 Strategic Objectives 8D and 9E respectively

⁸ Roberts, S 2008 On the Same Map? A Snapshot of the Relationships between UK Energy Policy and the English Regions. Report to the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform. Bristol: Centre for Sustainable Energy; Banks N et al 2012 What are the Factors Influencing Energy Behaviours and Decision-making in the Non-domestic Sector? Centre for Sustainable Energy (Bristol) and the Environmental Change Institute, University of Oxford

⁹ www.storiesofchange.ac.uk

¹⁰ https://storiesfutureworks.wordpress

The rapid industrialisation of the Derwent Valley in the latter half of the 18th century resulted in a remarkable transformation of its built environment, with significant innovations in both industrial and domestic architecture. The pioneering textile industries at Derby, Darley Abbey, Milford, Belper and Cromford were at the forefront of innovations in textile mill construction during this period, as indicated by the development of sophisticated water-powered technology, fireproof construction methods, and heating and ventilation systems.¹ These innovative designs influenced the architecture of mills in Cheshire, Lancashire, Yorkshire and beyond, including Scotland, Ireland, Continental Europe and North America. However, with the establishment of rival centres of cotton production and the growth of steam-powered mills, the 19th century witnessed a fundamental shift in the focus of innovation towards northern England.² The creation of new industrial settlements for factory labour represents a second important area of innovation. New types of purpose-built workers’ housing, created in the Derwent Valley from the late 18th century,³ became common in other textile colonies and in growing industrial centres in many other parts of the world.⁴ Key examples of this influential workers’ housing include the terraces with second-floor workshops at North Street, Cromford, terraces with interlocking plans at Belper and Milford, and the cluster houses of Darley Abbey and Belper (Strategic Objective 9B).

A combination of detailed archaeological survey and targeted historical research⁵ is needed to discover to what extent the industrial and domestic buildings which were first developed in the Derwent Valley had a direct influence on wider national and international trends.⁶ The early chronology of the Derwent Valley mill buildings is clear, but the mechanisms by which they may have influenced developments elsewhere require further investigation. Engineers and managers moving from site to site no doubt shared innovations and expertise, while descriptions and visual images of the Derwent Valley mills are likely also to have played a role. There is, however, a need for a synthesis not only of the extent of the Valley’s influence in Britain and beyond but also of the processes involved in the transmission of these new ideas.

Mike Nevell

Fig.4.60 Slater Mill, Pawtucket, Rhode Island. Samuel Slater, born in Belper in 1768 and employed at Strutt’s Mill from the age of 10, was the first migrant to achieve a profitable transfer of Arkwright’s technology across the Atlantic.⁷ With partners William Amy and Smith Brown, he established at Pawtucket in 1793 a wooden water-powered mill dedicated to the manufacture of cotton thread (American School, c.1790: Smithsonian Institution, Washington DC; ã Bridgeman Images)

References

¹ Menuge, A 1993 ‘The cotton mills of the Derbyshire Derwent and its tributaries’. IAR 16 (1), 38–61; Palmer, M et al 2012. Industrial Archaeology: A Handbook. York: CBA, 184–205; Strategic Objective 9A

² Calladine, A and Fricker, J 1993 East Cheshire Textile Mills. London: HMSO; Giles, C and Goodall, I 1992 Yorkshire Textile Mills, 1770–1930. London: HMSO; Williams, M with Farnie, D A 1992 Cotton Mills in Greater Manchester. Preston: Carnegie

³ Chapman, S D 1976 ‘Workers’ housing in the cotton factory colonies, 1770–1850’. Textile History 7,112–39

⁴ Caffyn, L 1986 Workers’ Housing in West Yorkshire, 1750–1920. London: HMSO; Dewhurst, L 1989 ‘Housing the workforce: A case study of West Yorkshire, 1750–1900’. IAR 11 (2), 117–35; Timmins, G 2000 ‘Housing quality in rural textile colonies, c.1800–1850: The Ashworth settlements revisited’. IAR 22 (1), 21–37

⁵ Badcock, A and Malaws, B A 2004 ‘Recording people and processes at large industrial structures’ in Barker, D and Cranstone, D 2004 The Archaeology of Industrialisation. Leeds: Maney, 269–89

⁶ Bruland, K 1989 British Technology and European Industrialization: The Norwegian Textile Industry in the Mid Nineteenth Century. Cambridge: CUP; Jeremy, D J 1973 ‘Innovation in American textile technology during the early 19th century.’ Technology and Culture 14, 40–76; Jones, E 1985 Industrial Architecture in Britain 1750–1939. London: Batsford; Pursell, C W 1964 ‘Thomas Digges and William Pearce: An example of the transit of technology.’ William and Mary Quarterly 21, 551–60

⁷ Everitt, G et al 2006 Samuel Slater: Hero or Traitor? Milford: Maypole