Child labour in an industrial town : a study of child workers in Birmingham, 1750 to 1880
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There has been extensive historical research into child labour in industries such as textiles and coal mining, but there has been little focus on children employed in Birmingham industries such as pin making and button making. This thesis illuminates the extent and nature of child labour in Birmingham and the significant contribution made by child workers to industrialisation between 1750 and 1880. It draws attention to the importance of children’s earnings for family incomes and suggests that some families migrated to the town in search of paid employment for their children as well as adults. The attitudes of employers, Poor Law officials, parents and children towards early work are explored, finding that child workers were regarded as an integral part of the Birmingham economy. \n \nThis thesis provides a case study of child labour and child workers in an industrial town. It uses a wide range of primary sources to highlight the experiences of thousands of child workers who were not bound as apprentices to employers, but engaged on a daily or weekly basis. It challenges the view that the employment of children in manufacturing was a relatively short-lived phenomenon during the early stages of industrialisation, arguing that child workers were widely employed in Birmingham’s factories and workshops until the 1870s. It highlights the strategies adopted by labouring families to provide their children with access to basic schooling, and identifies the specific threats to children’s health from industrial employment. Finally, this thesis argues that nineteenth-century migration schemes which sent poor children to work on Canadian farms represented a global dimension in the history of child labour.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".