Published by Maney Publishing (c) Association for Industrial Archaeology INDUSTRIAL ARCHAEOLOGY REVIEW, XXVI: 1, 2004 Monasteries of Manufacture: Questioning the Origins of English Industrial Architecture PAUL BELFORD Studies of industrial sites have tended to focus on purely functional understandings of their origins, layout, design and meaning. Industrial buildings have often been seen as an entity apart from other forms of post-medieval architectural expression. This is symptomatic of the isolation of industrial archaeology, not only from the broader spectrum of archaeological thought but also from other disciplines which strive towards a deeper understanding of the development of consumer society. This paper explores the origin of the typical industrial complex, arguing that elements of medieval cognition were retained into the 19th century. INTRODUCTION The industrialised society which emerged during the post-medieval period was based on the manufacture of identity through the production and consumption of goods. Almost 40 years ago it was pointed out that the study of industrial archaeology should be 'concerned with people rather than things', 1 a thought more recently echoed by Kenneth Hudson, who emphasised that things 'whether they are steam engines [or] cotton mills ... are valuable only in so far as they provide evidence about the people who used them'. 2 Yet much more work has been done on the minutiae of things, specifically buildings, than on the broader social landscapes within which these things developed. Moreover, industrial society is often perceived as a dis- tinct entity from earlier societies as a result of the so-called 'industrial revolution'. How- ever, it is evident that industrialisation only occurred as a response to the gradual emer- gence of consumerism in earlier periods. Roger Leech has suggested that in looking at consumerism we must look back well into the 16th century.3 That century saw notable religious and philosophical fluctuations, and concomitant changes in social, political and economic landscapes. Ideological questioning continued into the 17th century - probably the most exciting period in English history, and a century which saw for the first time the emergence of overtly capitalist economic theory.4 Overseas English imperial expansion was the catalyst for a commercial revolution and subsequent industrialisation, leading to what Christopher Hill has described as a 'world safe for business men to make profits in' . 5 Changes in the nature and structure of trade and production ultimately developed into the capitalist system which is still with us today.6 Aside from portable artefacts, the only remains of earlier phases of consumer society are buildings. As with other artefact types, buildings were items that were both manu- factured and consumed; moreover, buildings that were used for industrial purposes had a uniquely additional dimension - they were places within which both production and con- sumption took place. Hitherto such buildings have been explored from a largely functional perspective. However, it is clear that 'factories [and] workshops [are] ... physical expressions of human behaviour';7 the space within and around them both structures and is structured by social relations and identities. 8 Conse- quently an understanding of the design and use of space within the industrial complex is essential in understanding later post-medieval industrial society. Just as the period of indus- trialisation represents a development based on earlier periods, so too the physical spaces within which industrial activities took place were borne out of older experiences in the design, construction and use of non-domestic buildings. COURTYARD ORIGINS: THE FACTORY AS CITADEL In 1760 John Love and Thomas Manson of Sheffield established a partnership in the newly emerging crucible steel industry, in which neither of them had any prior experi- ence. The document confirming this partner- ship says that the two partners 'shall and will be and continue co-partners and joint dealers in the Art, Trade, Mystery and Business of Running and Casting Steel'.9 This style of wording was common, and the description sums up well the origins of many industrial processes, a combination of hard-nosed 'trade and business', with the 'art' of manu- facture and its associated 'mysteries'. In order to retain the mysteries of production, the designers and builders of industrial premises deliberately turned to an earlier architectural form which had been designed to protect secrets. This was the courtyard. As Oscar Newman has noted in the domestic context, © The Association for Industrial Archaeology