Carlyle's use of the word "mechanical" morphs throughout the essay, from the discussion of literal machines, to machines of society, and even to the mechanical workings of the mind. How does this progression serve to enforce his characterization of an age? Does he succeed in supporting his somewhat broad generalizations? Yet historians have not confronted early textile engineering. As a research topic, it has not found its place. Various approaches have been tried: this is a ‘submerged sector’ with virtually no useable sources, so as an industry it is unknowable beyond the familiar great men and famous firms; or it is a matter of technology, a question in metal and wood, nuts, screws and bolts, a progression towards mechanical efficiency, in which those same great men represent human input; or it is a sideshow of the textile industry, whose energy fed it and led it; or it was essentially quite static, operating in almost the same way at the end of the transformative century as it had at the beginning. As lines of enquiry, none of these is sufficient. Development and employment of modern war machines such as tanks, aircraft, submarines and the modern battleship Reciprocating steam engine replaced by gas turbines, internal combustion engines and electric motors

Employers will need to establish what training is appropriate in each particular circumstance; for example the relevant trade association may be able to advise and have training schemes in place for some work activities. For many areas, industry-recognised, externally-provided training on the use of work equipment (eg for mounting abrasive wheels, or the operation of construction plant) is available from a wide range of organisations. Suggestions for finding suitable training providers and courses are available in HSE's Health and safety training: A brief guide. On this point, see “Foreign Policy as Industrial Policy: the Anglo-French Commercial Treaty of 1786,” in Jeff Horn, The Path Not Taken: French Industrial Policy in the Age of Revolution 1750–1830 (forthcoming). In 1907, the first national census of British manufacturing confirmed textilemachine making as the largest single engineering branch. The nation's textile engineers presented ‘an overwhelmingly dominant force in world trade’, exporting 45 per cent of what they made. On the eve of the Great War, the industry employed 40,000, almost all of these men or apprentices. The United States was alone in the world in not relying upon Britain for most of its machines. Even so, just one Yorkshire town, Keighley, monopolized the American market in worsted machinery. The Age of Machinery (TAoM) is a case study of the machine builders who catered to and often inspired the textile manufactures of West Yorkshire. The setting is Keighley and Leeds but Sheffield, Birmingham, Manchester and Glasgow are on the horizon. The study is organised chronologically; chapters follow cohorts of initially unspecialised artisans with various primary occupational designations (carpenters, turners, mechanics, whitesmiths, millwrights) as they developed more specialised titles (spindle, flyer and roller manufacturers), and eventually founded a new industry: textile engineering.André Dubuc, “L’Industrie textile en Haute-Normandie au cours de la Révolution et de l’Empire,” in Le Textile en Normandie: Études diverses (Rouen 1975), 134–8. However, the general PUWER Approved Code of Practice and guidance specifically mentions two situations imposing minimum training obligations, in relation to: Chainsaw operators: Early in the nineteenth century, the throstle and the mule (a hybrid created by combining elements of jenny and water frame) had come to dominate spinning. The models worked alongside each other, with the throstle producing medium and coarser counts of yarn, in which it had a speed advantage. Exploitation of natural resources with little concern for the ecological consequences; a continuation of 19th century practices but at a larger scale. With further research into entrepreneurial activities during the revolutionary era, additional examples of hostility to mechanization, resistance to innovation, and spirited defense of customary means of production from around the hexagon could be multiplied. The massive outbreak of machine-breaking in 1789 was part of the dramatic transformation of the “threat from below” from the realm of rebelliousness into something new: modern revolutionary politics. The French Revolution recast social relationships, gave birth to new ideologies, and provided a model for how a small dedicated group could mobilize a vast nation for war, overcoming civil conflict and economic collapse through the mechanism of state-wielded Terror. Ever since, the legacy of these innovations has both inspired and dismayed.[74]

Aristocracy with weighted suffrage or male-only suffrage replaced by democracy with universal suffrage, parallel to one-party states Archer, Social Unrest and Popular Protest, 86; C. R. Dobson, Masters and Journeymen: A Pre-history of Industrial Relations 1717–1800 (London 1980), appendix; Moher, “From Suppression to Containment,” 74, 87–8, 90; and Rudé, The Crowd in History, 218.A final occurrence of machine-breaking in 1789 took place in southern Champagne. Subsistence was a particular problem in and around the city of Troyes, sparking a violent municipal revolution punctuated by a series of food riots that were accentuated by the Great Fear.[58] A deepening political conflict within the urban élite made it impossible for them to douse the flames spawned by fear and hunger among the restive unemployed textile workers and poor of the city of Troyes.[59] Randall, Before the Luddites, 248 and “The Philosophy of Luddism: The Case of the West of England Woolen Workers, ca. 1790–1809,” Technology and Culture, 27 (1986), 15. Cookson is particularly on guard against anachronisms and building the future into the past. Here she is particularly critical of economic history texts that, she concludes, tell us very little of how technology really evolved. Instead, it was a wide community-based endeavor characterized by casual work and subcontracting. Textile machines did not suddenly appear and radically change production. Instead they fed into existing systems and integrated with traditional social labor. Each process in the production, say, of yarn invited different solutions. For example, the development of slubbing—preparing the fiber for spinning—was, arguably, more important than was the actual mechanization of spinning the fiber. The process worked differently for cotton, wool, and flax. This is a complicated history that took place over a long period of time and was driven by specific locations and distinct community contexts. To tell this history, Cookson has scoured every fragment of available sources to gain a glimpse into this crucial, but all-too-often forgotten, world. It was, as she shows, these relatively uneducated gritty men of limited capital who spearheaded engineering achievements during this period. This was a revolution driven not by an “Industrial Enlightenment” and the new sciences, but by traditional skills and practices. The notion of an Industrial Enlightenment is not only ahistorical, but it dismisses the very people who birthed the machinery of industrialization.

You should ensure that self-propelled work equipment, including any attachments or towed equipment, is only driven by workers who have received appropriate training in the safe driving of such work equipment.' you provide seating and secured it the trailer. Well-made bales, if properly secured, may be adequate;

The Age of the Machine

Corporate exploitation of labor leading to the creation of strong trade unions as a countervailing force Big engineering attracts most attention, but the promise of resolving larger questions about industrialization lies in the smaller-scale. Pre-factory engineering, particularly in subcontracting, innovation-chasing, cash-limited, resource-constrained textile engineering, holds all the interest. Without it, how could industrialization have happened at all? Machines were fundamental to industrial change in the eighteenth century. What we call the industrial revolution is not to be understood without appreciating how they came to be imagined and built. One sobering theme of TAoM is the low persistence rate of machine-making firms which Cookson relates to the difficulties of intergenerational transition. Machine makers had their share of wastrel, incompetent or merely disinterested sons while the one widow who tried to run an inherited business disappointingly gave up as soon as she got a second offer of marriage! Yet fixation on the intergenerational survival of family firms overlooks the ways in which skills, inventiveness and culture were passed on through apprenticeship and training, which emerge as vital components of Cookson’s age of machinery, crucial to the artisanal knowledge that drove technological innovation and perhaps even as important as marriage in creating the social interconnections of the machine makers’ communities.