Hero's steam engine triggers Greek industrial revolution?

Hi! Something tells me this has been done before -- it must have. But just in case, here's the premise.

When Heron presented his steam-powered machine to the nobles in OTL (if I remember correctly), it was seen as an interesting toy but there was no need for it as a source of power because there were so many slaves running around.

Scenario 1: The nobles give him more funding for research and stuff and sees what else he can do for the sake of science and the study of nature.

Scenario 2: A noble with a lot of slaves sees steam moving an object. He knows concentrated sunlight can heat objects from the lighting of the Olympic torch [unless that's a myth], and Hero explains that heat can produce steam. He realizes that steam power can move objects being constructed from place to place, and decides to create the world's first assembly line using unskilled slaves to mass-produce products -- at first small products, and then as the technology improves larger ones. Just imagine them mass-producing shields or something like that. The noble's city state becomes strong and they beat up on everybody else (and possibly even unify Greece into a great power with a strong, industrial army).

I'm not that big on ancient Greek history, but how plausible would these scenarios be?

Thanks!

ACG

P.S. While we're on Greek history, consider the following hilarious idea, not as alternate history but as something else:

The Battle of Salamis is fought in Bologna instead [assuming Bologna existed!].

No wonder everyone confuses various battle sites

How about just have no "Great Migration" and the Roman Empire (or other classical powers) lasting. At some point, the Romans get bored from their roads and search for something more. They find the steam engine design and build-up a railway system.
By the 14th century, atomic bombs!

Wellllll... Steam engines don't "trigger" Industrial Revolutions.

The Industrial Revolution was well on its way by the time steam engines became a significant part of it. What did trigger the Revolution was a combination of expanding trade backed by the world's first modern banks in a period of rapidly improving science and agriculture. In the end the steam engine was much more a symptom than a cause. Which is not to say a steam engine would be without effect in Roman times, just that "We have an early steam engine," does not imply "In two hundred years we will have iPods."

I'm not too big on economic theory but IIRC neither the Romans nor the Greeks had economies that would be receptive to an industrial revolution. Slaves could do everything that needed to be done already.

Frex, with your mass production idea- I presume that in OTL there was a need for items in mass such as spearheads and the like. The work was already being done but with slaves to do all the heavy lifting. The trouble is that there's no financial incentive for someone to invest his money in this new technology when there are all these cheap slaves around and the existing methods of production were more than sufficient to meet demand.

The difference in OTL was that in early 19th C Britain there would have been much greater incentive to invest in the new technologies due to the huge foreign demand for British textiles. Thus, industrial machinery got it's break in the cotton industry.

As I said I'm no student of economic history but I think you have to take into account the social and economic factors that underlay the Industrial Revolution. Other societies have come close but the actual jump to an Industrial Revolution was only made once, in Britain.

Edit: Admiral Matt's response said what I wanted to much better than I could have put it.

Also, incidentally, if you want Greek city states using steam engines Hero's a bit late IIRC. Wasn't he knocking around in the last days of Ptolemaic Egypt?

It has been dealt with before, but:
Herons understanding of steam was used to make "heat-engines" that would open heavy temple doors without the use of human effort. So in use, yes, but to astonish the public and cement the autority of religion.

The problem isn't to have a working steam engine in ancient Greece; it's having the Greeks do anything with it. Inventions don't amount to much without the appropriate socio-economic environment.

Jared Diamond mentions the fact that the Disk of Phaestos, which dates from around 1600 BCE, was made by pressing a crude but operational form of movable type into soft clay--in other words, a Minoan craftsman had the basic understanding that would in later ages and civilizations lead to the invention of the printing press. But so what? In the Minoan civilization, literacy was the privilege of the courtly elite, and a method for issuing multiple copies of a same text simply fulfilled no need. It's the same with steam power in Hero's Greece--the society was already organized around the reliance on slavery for hard work.

The irony is that, if movable type had been discovered by the Hellenistic civilization, it would probably have taken off in a big way...

About the slavery argument.

When in the 18th century the Industrial Revolution started, the European powers also had large amounts of slaves working on plantations, in mines and for lots of other jobs. Just the type of slavery the Romans used. I don't see too much difference here. In fact, a comparison might be made between the surplus population caused by the agricultural revolution in 17th and 18th century Europe and the dolist plebs in imperial Rome. Both readily available sources of labor.

Further
To make use of steam engines, you need a populations that's at least somewhat educated, although considering the widespread use of child labor down to children aged 10 or sometimes even less in the XIX century, this should also not be overstated. Actually, literacy rates in the Roman Empire compared pretty reasonable with Industrial Age Europe, as attested by the widespread use of graffiti.

IIRC the first industrial use of the steam engine was caused by cotton ("Spinning Jenny"), which only source accessible to the Romans was India.
On the other hand, Roman togas and tunics were made of linen and wool...

Even if the use of the steam engine was viewed with promise, it would be impractical to use due to the lack of appropriate metals. Any classical steam-powered machine would be prone to bursting at the seams from the intense pressure.

Metals that could even come close to handling the pressure of an industrial steam engine weren't forged until (IIRC) the 14th-15th Century. And there's little chance of speeding up metallurgical development, as in an age where the richest people around fought eachother constantly, being able to forge armour and swords that were slightly stronger than your competetors' was very profitable.

Hendryk said:

It's the same with steam power in Hero's Greece--the society was already organized around the reliance on slavery for hard work.

The irony is that, if movable type had been discovered by the Hellenistic civilization, it would probably have taken off in a big way...

Click to expand...

Hmm. The problem I see here is that we know the Romans used water power; they keep finding sites from Europe with waterwheels, and some one (Pliny?) mentions how it was used in mining.

So it's not an Either/Or thing, necessarily.

Did Hero's invention affect James Watt and Newcomen, etc. at all? I mean, obviously Hero wasn't the last person to be aware of the toy, and if no one else used it, I suspect there's a reason.

Faeelin said:

Did Hero's invention affect James Watt and Newcomen, etc. at all? I mean, obviously Hero wasn't the last person to be aware of the toy, and if no one else used it, I suspect there's a reason.

Click to expand...

Newcomen and Watt stand at the end of a long tradition of tinkering with steam. The principle of Heron's steam engines most likely never was lost. In the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, crude steam-pressure devices are used to create a draft for hearthfires. The problem is that neither they nor Heron's aeolipile were good for anything.

Archdevil said:

About the slavery argument.

When in the 18th century the Industrial Revolution started, the European powers also had large amounts of slaves working on plantations, in mines and for lots of other jobs. Just the type of slavery the Romans used. I don't see too much difference here. In fact, a comparison might be made between the surplus population caused by the agricultural revolution in 17th and 18th century Europe and the dolist plebs in imperial Rome. Both readily available sources of labor.

Further
To make use of steam engines, you need a populations that's at least somewhat educated, although considering the widespread use of child labor down to children aged 10 or sometimes even less in the XIX century, this should also not be overstated. Actually, literacy rates in the Roman Empire compared pretty reasonable with Industrial Age Europe, as attested by the widespread use of graffiti.

IIRC the first industrial use of the steam engine was caused by cotton ("Spinning Jenny"), which only source accessible to the Romans was India.
On the other hand, Roman togas and tunics were made of linen and wool...

Click to expand...

Very good points, Archdevil. As I read your post, a lightbulb went on in my head. It seems that Republican Rome was similar to Pre-Industrial England in many important ways. Both places had a landed aristocracy with plenty of slave labor, but also had a surplus of "plebs". I think it's possible that the steam engine could have taken hold in the Republic, given the socio-economic conditions there.

Unfortunately, Hero of Alexandria was born after the advent of the Roman Empire. What we'd need is a POD that has the steam engine discovered much earlier, during one of the Republican Crises. This would allow a technological solution, rather than a political solution, to the social problems of the time.

What do you think?

- Rob

Admiral Matt brought up an interesting point.

Even if the sociopolitical situation is such that no Industrial Revolution occurs, what sort of use might there be in the Roman world for Hero(n)'s steam engine?

Some kind of weapon perhaps? One could spew scalding-hot steam into enemy troops to break their lines. Or perhaps during one of the "Crises of the 3rd Century," a rebel general with manpower problems uses it to mass-produce weapons (he doesn't have enough slaves or techies).

A clockwork ballista? If they keep extensive tinkering going for a century or two and have some lucky breaks it ought to be doable. Pressure-based weapons instead of tension-based ones could have come to dominate seige warfare until gunpowder showed up.

RHaden said:

Very good points, Archdevil. As I read your post, a lightbulb went on in my head. It seems that Republican Rome was similar to Pre-Industrial England in many important ways. Both places had a landed aristocracy with plenty of slave labor, but also had a surplus of "plebs". I think it's possible that the steam engine could have taken hold in the Republic, given the socio-economic conditions there.

Unfortunately, Hero of Alexandria was born after the advent of the Roman Empire. What we'd need is a POD that has the steam engine discovered much earlier, during one of the Republican Crises. This would allow a technological solution, rather than a political solution, to the social problems of the time.

What do you think?

- Rob

Click to expand...

That's some selective reading you've got there. It rather assumes aristocrats with slave labor and a bunch of unused proles caused the Industrial Revolution. Slow down.

Well, if Heron had invented gunpoweder instead...and the Greeks had used it as a weapon? Gunpoweder weapons open up mass-warfare, which at its limits begins to favor efficiency....after all, you can't mobilize more than 100% of your males for mass gunpowder warfare....

So..what about that as an alternative for sparking a Greek Industial revolution?

RHaden said:

Very good points, Archdevil. As I read your post, a lightbulb went on in my head. It seems that Republican Rome was similar to Pre-Industrial England in many important ways.

Both places had a landed aristocracy with plenty of slave labor, but also had a surplus of "plebs". I think it's possible that the steam engine could have taken hold in the Republic, given the socio-economic conditions there.

Unfortunately, Hero of Alexandria was born after the advent of the Roman Empire. What we'd need is a POD that has the steam engine discovered much earlier, during one of the Republican Crises. This would allow a technological solution, rather than a political solution, to the social problems of the time.

What do you think?

- Rob

Click to expand...

My main point writing that post was to put some perspective in the classical notion that the Roman Empire reliance on slave labor would mean there is no use for a steam engine. Conveniently ignoring that the cotton used for the early industrial revolution was all provided by slave labor. The only difference being that for Britain slaves were an ocean away.

Considering the similarities between Rome and early industrial Britain, I agree. Roman levels of organization (on a continental scale!) were only reached again after the Renaissance and the Romans road network and aquaducts were probably only equaled in scale and scope when the Europeans started digging their canals and building railroads.

I think the main point against Roman use of the steam engine is twofold:

Firstly, someone should come up with a clearly useful application, like the Spinning Jenny in OTL. Further applications like railroads, mine pumps and steamships will follow from there.

But probably more important: Effiecient steam engines require high quality steel the Romans just did not have. An important reason the later Europeans had this steel was the development of gunpowder leading to bronze and later iron cannons, and hand guns. These weapons required and thus led to higher quality materials which could later be used for steam engines.
Now, this does not mean no Roman steam engine, but theirs will be not as efficient, although eventually further development, if slower then in Europe, will happen.

ninebucks said:

Even if the use of the steam engine was viewed with promise, it would be impractical to use due to the lack of appropriate metals. Any classical steam-powered machine would be prone to bursting at the seams from the intense pressure.

Metals that could even come close to handling the pressure of an industrial steam engine weren't forged until (IIRC) the 14th-15th Century. And there's little chance of speeding up metallurgical development, as in an age where the richest people around fought eachother constantly, being able to forge armour and swords that were slightly stronger than your competetors' was very profitable.

Click to expand...

Then why was there a chance of doing so in the 14th-15thc? IIRC people didn't suddenly stop fighting in those centuries.

Had there been a need for Steam Engines wouldn't they have been built by the very armorers that you're talking about? Didn't they have Damascus steel?

NapoleonXIV said:

Then why was there a chance of doing so in the 14th-15thc? IIRC people didn't suddenly stop fighting in those centuries.

Had there been a need for Steam Engines wouldn't they have been built by the very armorers that you're talking about? Didn't they have Damascus steel?

Click to expand...

But isn't Damascus steel relent upon skilled blacksmith producing it in small quantities while using a specific type of iron ore that can only be obtained through Indian trade? An industrial revolution would need metallurgy advanced enough not only to produce high grade metals but high grade metals in large enough quantities to be put into wide scale use.

King Gorilla said:

But isn't Damascus steel relent upon skilled blacksmith producing it in small quantities while using a specific type of iron ore that can only be obtained through Indian trade? An industrial revolution would need metallurgy advanced enough not only to produce high grade metals but high grade metals in large enough quantities to be put into wide scale use.

Click to expand...

Exactly.

Furthermore, if you were to plot the growth of certain technologies across time, you would see things like roads and aquaducts tend to peak during high civilisation and flatten out afterwards, or things like steam engines, which exhibit the same pattern, but more radically. But if you were to look at the graph for metallurgy, it would pretty much be a straight line. Almost regardless of the socio-political surroundings, metallurgy will develop at the same rate, there's not much you can do to speed it up or slow it down. Meaning, unfortunately, that there is not going to be adequate enough metals to fuel an industrial revolution until roughly the time it happened in OTL.