TECHNOLOGY AND CULTURE Book Reviews 621 There are a number of strengths to Eggert’s book. First, he deals with both entrepreneurs and workers and with their interactions. Second, he considers the impact that economic and technological changes had on the spatial, social, and political life of the community. Third, Harrisburg and its experience probably is far more typical of what happened in 19th-century America than are the more dramatic accounts of the rise of massive enterprises in large cities. Most of 19th-century America still lived in small cities, towns, and farms; only a small percentage lived in large metropolitan areas or in bleak mill towns. Nor did most firms grow to become U.S. Steel or General Motors. The typical experience was for firms to be born, grow modestly, and then either remain stagnant or die after two or three generations. Harrisburg fits that pattern. Also, by dealing with firms that were not “first movers” in terms of technological innovation, firms that adopted new technologies slowly and hesitantly, Eggert is examining a technological experience closer to the norm. Despite these very real strengths, there are also some shortcomings to Eggert’s work. The most important of these is simply that it is not very exciting to read. I can hear my students complaining if I assigned it for class—“It’s boring!” “It’s dull!”—despite all my protestations about the importance and significance of the book. Perhaps its rather turgid nature has to do with the subject itself—Harrisburg. Since it was so typical, there was nothing dramatic to present. Eggert himself seems to believe that. At one point he says, “Harrisburg’s politics, as so much else about the community, tended to be steady, bland, and relatively unexciting” (p. 315). Maybe even John Updike could not find the drama, romance, and excitement in 19th-century Harrisburg, but I do suspect Anthony F. C. Wallace would have been able to present more drama in the small patterns and normality of the city. Eggert seems most comfortable as a number cruncher, as he masterfully analyzes data from the census and other sources. In most respects, this is an excellent and very important book for our understanding of industrialization in 19th-century America. John N. Ingham Dr. Ingham is professor of history at the University of Toronto. His most recent book is Making Iron and Steel: Independent Mills in Pittsburgh, 1820-1920 (Columbus: Ohio State University Press, 1991). Bale o’Cotton: The Mechanical Art of Cotton Ginning. By Karen G. Britton. College Station: Texas A&M University Press, 1992. Pp. xvii+138; illustrations, notes, bibliography, index. $27.50. November 1993 marked the 200th anniversary of a patent granted to Eli Whitney for a “new invented cotton gin, or machine for cleansing and separating cotton from its seeds.” And, if allowance is made for the priority of invention of certain important features of the machine by Hogden Holmes of South Carolina, Whitney’s reputation as the “father 622 Book Reviews TECHNOLOGY AND CULTURE of the cotton gin” has remained intact, quite unlike the situation regarding the claims for his parenthood of the “American system” of interchangeable parts manufacture. Karen Gerhardt Britton, a freelance writer from Houston, Texas, provides us with an overview of the history of the domestication of Gossypium, the rise of the cotton textile industry, and the familiar story of Whitney’s invention. She then chronicles the expansion of cotton culture with an emphasis on the role of the crop in Texas and a detailed discussion of ginning technology and the antebellum cotton trade. If the technical legacy of Whitney provides the basis for the first half of Bale o Cotton, it is the innovations introduced by Robert S. Munger which constitute the core developments chronicled in the later chapters of the book. During the mid-1880s, Munger developed what came to be called “system ginning,” a series of interrelated pneumatic materials-handling devices that conveyed the raw seed cotton from the farmer’s wagon through air ducts to a separator and distributed it to a battery ofgins from which the cleaned lint went to a condenser that, after further cleaning, produced a batt of cotton and then conveyed...