Why didn't the Romans invent steam engines?

[NittenDormer]

... and if they had, what would they have looked like?

[manna]

G'Day Folks

 

Don't know what a Roman steam engine would look like, but seeing everything would have to have been made by hand, not very big, it may have slowly industrialized the Empire but I doubt it.

 

The reason they didn't invent the steam engine, although they understood the principle of steam power, was there reliance on slaves to do the dirty work, so the Empire stagnated, there only driving force was to acquire, more slaves.

 

manna  

[Edge]

To be pedantic, they did

 

 

More precisely, Hiro’s steam engine was made in Roman occupied Egypt in approximately 70AD - in Alexandria to be precise. Apparently it was used to magically open doors in the temple of Apollo there

 

But I think you’re talking about steam LOCOMOTIVES (sorry about the capitals, on my phone and no bold option on the mobile site) and answer would be that they had horses, which was good enough for them I don’t think that the idea of there being anything better at moving things about came along until the industrial revolution

[Steamport Southport]

What have Romans ever done for us?

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aeolipile

 

 

 

 

 

The Judean People's Front

[kevinlms]

... and if they had, what would they have looked like?

Don't know, but we do know what track gauge they would have used!

[rockershovel]

Hero didn’t invent the rotary reaction turbine, it was described in several sources at least a century earlier. He may well have become associated with it later, in the popular mind.

 

The “Alexandria temple doors” effect was a hydraulic effect https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=WzKhPZi8IuQ

 

The Greeks and later, the Romans knew quite a lot about hydraulics, wind turbines and using falling water to create pressurised air supplies. What they never worked out, was how to extract useful power outputs from them, although they DID know how to make large windmills for grinding grain.

 

To provide the impetus to develop a device, there needs to be a perceived requirement. The Romans knew a great deal about water flow engineering, constructing aqueducts spanning very long distances. The first steam engines were static pumps for mining applications, working on condensing rather than pressure expansion. These aren’t particularly challenging in metallurgical terms, and the Romans certainly understood the principles, so I can only assume that the limiting factor was that they didn’t possess the metallurgical knowledge to produce either the necessary castings, or the cutting tools to achieve the necessary fitted, bored and turned parts.

[Richard Lee]

I understand that slavery was cheaper than mechanisation in the short term, so no financial incentive.

[Hroth]

Talking off the top of my head, the Romans didn't have steam engines because they didn't dig deep mines that required drainage and, I think more importantly, didn't have access to gunpowder.  The technologies to create successful large scale castings and work the resulting metal derive from the European need to produce weapons capable of reducing stone fortifications and slaughter armoured enemies on the battlefield.  I don't think Rome faced any enemies who didn't follow the principle of "line up and charge with largely inferior weapons", and the fortifications they did encounter were of traditional earth bank and palisade construction.

 

It took Europe something like 4 or 5 centuries to go from cannon made from wooden staves reinforced with iron hoops (Eeek!) to British naval 32 pounders that could stand the pressure day in, day out (without exploding the wrong way).  In a continent so devoted to internecine warfare, that timespan and degree of parallel development in tools and metallurgy would be beyond the Romans.

 

But they might have built some rather spiffing railway stations!

[Colin_McLeod]

Didn't the Roman steam trains run on the SPQR.

[APOLLO]

We would have some superbus locomotive designers

 

Sir Nero Gresley

 

Octavia Bulleidius

 

Sir Maxima Stannier

 

Georgia Julius Churchwardium

 

Bearing the Roman "Standard" would have been

 

Romulus Riddlelia !!

 

Brit 15 "Apollo" - A joint Greek / Roman God

[Talltim]

In next week’s episode, Why didn’t the Egyptians build funiculars?

[rockershovel]

Talking off the top of my head, the Romans didn't have steam engines because they didn't dig deep mines that required drainage and, I think more importantly, didn't have access to gunpowder.  The technologies to create successful large scale castings and work the resulting metal derive from the European need to produce weapons capable of reducing stone fortifications and slaughter armoured enemies on the battlefield.  I don't think Rome faced any enemies who didn't follow the principle of "line up and charge with largely inferior weapons", and the fortifications they did encounter were of traditional earth bank and palisade construction.

 

It took Europe something like 4 or 5 centuries to go from cannon made from wooden staves reinforced with iron hoops (Eeek!) to British naval 32 pounders that could stand the pressure day in, day out (without exploding the wrong way).  In a continent so devoted to internecine warfare, that timespan and degree of parallel development in tools and metallurgy would be beyond the Romans.

 

But they might have built some rather spiffing railway stations!

Which (sort of) illustrates my point. The Romans made great efforts to build aqueducts conveying drinking water into their cities, and constructing drains to remove effluent from them. They knew and used canal transport. They knew, and used, both the rag-and-chain pump and the Archimedean Screw). They certainly understood the principle of creating a vacuum by cooling steam in an enclosed space (Hero described this as a possible danger in experiments of this sort). They understood the use of cranks. If they COULD have constructed the sort of condensing engines which were the first steam engines, they would certainly have done so.

[kevinlms]

In next week’s episode, Why didn’t the Egyptians build funiculars?

My theory, that is my own theory...

 

[Boris]

I read an academic paper once regarding the extrapolation of technological progression and its likely the Romans would have invented steam locos around the 15th century at the same time as their industrial revolution.  What makes it interesting is the point the author made that designs probably would not have been that different because for most technology there is an engineering reason why it goes together the way it does, although we'd be living on the Moon and maybe Mars by now if the Roman Empire hadn't imploded.

[Zero Gravitas]

I also remember reading about how if the Romans had the steam engine, they would have been on the moon if the empire hadn’t collapsed - although I seem to recall they would get there in about the tenth century.

 

However, I’ve also read that the real problem the Romans had was their numbering system, which was not compatible with engineering solutions (and lacked a character for “0”).

[Tony Davis]

 

The Judean People's Front

 

Splitters!!!

[phil gollin]

.

 

There were many ingenious water and air powered "machines" (opening doors, operating statues of gods, etc....) but they SEEM (to us) to be novelties.  And yet the Romans did not invent a mechanical clock, or complex water mills with shaft operated machinery.  Also, their understanding of even quite simple metallurgy was deficient.

 

Did they even have "plateway" horse drawn railways ?

 

People forget that the "dark ages" was actually full of small evolutionary steps.  Metallurgy and watermills, in particular, crept forward.  Mining, of both coal and minerals, also improved.

 

As for a "Roman Steam engine" ?  Who knows ?  It took over a hundred years EVEN WITH ALL THE ENGINEERING IMPROVEMENTS to get from the first embryonic stationary steam engines to reasonable small steam locomotives - the Romans would take longer and need some sort of economic incentive.

 

.

[Giz Puk]

If the Romans had built steam engines..... and then steam locomotives to haul goods trains across the empire...... would all railway lines have been straight??

This pondering is driving me round the bend.( an old joke but still makes me chuckle).

Yours Aye,

Giz

[Hroth]

I also remember reading about how if the Romans had the steam engine, they would have been on the moon if the empire hadn’t collapsed - although I seem to recall they would get there in about the tenth century.

 

However, I’ve also read that the real problem the Romans had was their numbering system, which was not compatible with engineering solutions (and lacked a character for “0”).

They were completely Pointless.....

[rockershovel]

I remember being told, long ago, that the Romans never really discovered coal, or more correctly never discovered open-cast coal and shallow mined coal in worthwhile quantities, which was the transforming element of the Industrial Revolution.

 

Coal provides hugely more power than charcoal, wind or hydraulic power. The ability to heat much larger quantities of material to much higher temperatures, paves the way to greatly improved metallurgy - from cast iron, to wrought iron, to steel and the forging, cutting and drilling tools to work it.

[rockershovel]

[quote

However, I’ve also read that the real problem the Romans had was their numbering system, which was not compatible with engineering solutions (and lacked a character for “0”).

 

Considering the quite major feats of surveying the Romans carried out in the construction of their aqueduct systems, I’m quite sure that if they had felt the need for a revised mathematical system, they were quite capable of devising one.

Edited November 27, 2017 by rockershovel

[luckymucklebackit]

We would have some superbus locomotive designers

 

Sir Nero Gresley

 

Octavia Bulleidius

 

Sir Maxima Stannier

 

Georgia Julius Churchwardium

 

Bearing the Roman "Standard" would have been

 

Romulus Riddlelia !!

 

Brit 15 "Apollo" - A joint Greek / Roman God

 

 

LXCIII "Flying Pict"?

[runs as required]

I was aware when working in China by the way the Chinese always prided themselves at continuing to keep their Empire together in one piece through the Dynasties from the time of the Egyptians up to (our) Millennium - compared to the ephemeral (here today gone tomorrow) Romans, Greeks, us and the Russians etc.

 

I never thought to ask about a long time awareness of the power of steam.

dh

[NIK]

Hi,

 

The incredible supply of slaves as mentioned previously seems like a factor to be considered.

 

Maybe the Roman model of military might to keep the Empire together encouraged the best thinkers to get into command in the army.

 

Also was there enough coal accessible in the Empire to facilitate the development of steam engines?.

 

A lot of timber went for building including forts and pallisades and heating the baths and underfloor heating (hypocaust?).

 

Perhaps the Roman Empire model included restricting technology in case the states they had absorbed started rapidly making weapons to use against the Roman army.

 

Also weren't the Empire's decision makers in Rome so wealthy they had no need to lend money to / be patrons of inventors.

The Roman elite may have cherry picked aspects of Greek civilisation without understanding the importance of fundamental learning (although the Romans did build the Pantheon with a Roman Concrete domed roof).

 

 

I'm off to Thrace thrice.

 

Salute.

 

Nicholus Murphius

[Welly]

I was aware when working in China by the way the Chinese always prided themselves at continuing to keep their Empire together in one piece through the Dynasties from the time of the Egyptians up to (our) Millennium - compared to the ephemeral (here today gone tomorrow) Romans, Greeks, us and the Russians etc.

 

I never thought to ask about a long time awareness of the power of steam.

dh

I believe that the logogram system of writing in China made it possible for a averagely literate Chinese to be able to read text from 4000 years ago unlike the Western phonetic writing system. This may have been a contributory factor to the endurance of the Chinese Empire.