ABSTRACT
The Industrial Revolution was "revolutionary" because the technological progress it witnessed and the subsequent transformation of the economy were not ephemeral events and moved society to a permanent different economic trajectory. Although economic historians tend naturally to emphasize its economic aspects, the Industrial Revolution illustrates the limitations of the compartmentalization of historical sciences. The apparent dominance of invention over abstention suggested by total factor productivity analysis, one of the most striking findings of the New Economic History, seems less. The philosophical question whether industrial society has been a positive development in human history reaches beyond the boundaries of economic history. Britain's geographical advantages over other economies have often seemed to be good explanations for its economic success after 1750. The key to British technological success was that it had a comparative advantage in microinventions.
