Rome was too big to be a fascist state. Think of how well the Empire suppressed Christianity...Djingodjango said:
A Roman Printing Press
- Thread starter anzac 15
- Start date
Quite so. To my knowledge, no author was ever persecuted during the Roman Empire. I suppose that too often we look at the past within the mind frame of our times. I would expect a Roman emperor to be flabbergasted if he could have a look at Stalin Russia, or Hitler Germany (or even to Wilhelmine Germany and its kulturkampf).Faeelin said:
The only "ideological" trait of Rome was Rome itself, sublimated in the Emperor.
anzac 15
This might be going a bit out on a limb here,but when you consider how little contact rome historically had with both india and china ,to increase by an order of magnitude the awareness/knowledge of these countries via the press is going to really prompt some roman avarice.So I'm assuming sooner or later rome try's to make contact.Could this lead rome down the path of becoming a true maritime power?
I realise this is a real stretch,but the reason this occured to me was because I can remember another post about a failed attempt by rome to colonise?Yemen(is this accurate).If this is the case,maybe a successful conquest of yemen could be a stepping stone to india and china,maybe for further conquest or further trade.After all,if someone had said to king Phillip?and Queen Isabella of spain ,hey there's these guy's accross the ocean called aztec;s or inca's or whatever,and there absolutely loaded with gold and silver and plenty of scrummy new things to eat,but were not going to make and effort to get there,well maybe phil might get some of his mates down at the inquisition offices to lend some inspiration.
I'm not sure,but have I just lost the plot completely?Nah!
This might be going a bit out on a limb here,but when you consider how little contact rome historically had with both india and china ,to increase by an order of magnitude the awareness/knowledge of these countries via the press is going to really prompt some roman avarice.So I'm assuming sooner or later rome try's to make contact.Could this lead rome down the path of becoming a true maritime power?
I realise this is a real stretch,but the reason this occured to me was because I can remember another post about a failed attempt by rome to colonise?Yemen(is this accurate).If this is the case,maybe a successful conquest of yemen could be a stepping stone to india and china,maybe for further conquest or further trade.After all,if someone had said to king Phillip?and Queen Isabella of spain ,hey there's these guy's accross the ocean called aztec;s or inca's or whatever,and there absolutely loaded with gold and silver and plenty of scrummy new things to eat,but were not going to make and effort to get there,well maybe phil might get some of his mates down at the inquisition offices to lend some inspiration.
I'm not sure,but have I just lost the plot completely?Nah!
Possibly. There was a little knowledge of each other. India was definately known to the Romans, since there's a Latin word for India, India, as well as a word for the Ganges river, Ganges(ain't it amazing how much our language has drifted from Latin?). The Chinese were known to the Romans as the Seres. Likewise, the Romans were known to the Chinese as Da'qin, and their empire as Ta Ts'in (not sure if I got those right).anzac 15 said:
Now, there was little direct contact, but there were attempts (mostly on the part of the Chinese), such as Gan Ying's voyage in AD 98, which made it to the black sea. Supposedly, Marcus Aurelius received a Chinese envoy. Still, the empires had minimal knowledge of each other, though both had a decent idea about India.
With increased info about each other, I can definately see the empires making further attempts at trade. Rome would definately have another go at conquering Yemen, maybe Axum as well (though I'd say Axum would make a much better ally to the Romans, but I've always been partial to the Ethiopians). From there, they could control the rest of Arabia, then have alot more control over their trade with India, cutting out the Parthians. IIRC, there was some evidence of a Roman colony in India...anzac 15 said:
I'm willing to bet that Rome would then be able to take Mesopotamia pretty well, with Arabia in its hands. Deprived of Mesopotamia, the Parthians are going to have some serious problems on their hands. With some of their best (and most hellenized) territory gone, I can see the Parthians succumbing to an earlier Persian restoration. Perhaps the Persians then go after India, to compensate.
Anyway, I don't really see Rome trying to conquer any parts of India for the time being, though they'll certainly try to influence the region. I'd think they'd realize its a tad to far to rule directly. Perhaps they might seize a port or two (or build ones of their own) somewhere, to help out their merchants. I'd expect Persia to do likewise.
China will also probably be willing to expand its maritime trade as well. With this increased trade going on in the Indian and Pacific Oceans, I can see some increased activity going on with all those islands. More than one state whose primary economic activity would be piracy...
Not quite sure what your getting at there...anzac 15 said:
However, on the topic of the New World...
Well, with an increased knowledge base, I can imagine a few enterprising merchants digging up some of Aristarchus' works (available at the corner bookstore for only 5 denarii) and saying "hey, lets just go the other way around the world, forget all this India crap". I don't think it'd work straight shot the first time around (lets assume that they're hopefully not bright enough to realize how far it actually should be). Eventually, one of three things will happen:
1) they discover the azores (might already be known as the blessed islands) and, from there, manage to make it across.
2) somebody tries a northerly route and does the iceland-greenland-canada trip. they start sailing south, looking for China.
3) somebody goes the soutern route from Africa, and bumps into Brazil.
Now, no matter what, improved shipbuilding will help. I'm assuming the ships will get better with all the Indian trade going on. Now, if the Romans hit Brazil or Canada first, it could be awhile before anything interesting happens. Eventually though, they'll bump into Mexico. And thats when the fun starts.
LordKalvan said:
Well, Ovidius got himself exiled for 'immorality' (though one wonders what truly lies behind that). But yes, the Romans would most likely be shocked by modern examples of autocracy, though they'd probably also be a little envious. Imagine an emperor with a telephone ... and the means to tap other people's
I would say that a Roman emperor would love the idea of political Kommissars: just imagine not having kittens every other day on legions mutinies, and would be emperorscarlton_bach said:
As far as Ovidius, who knows the real reasons? but in any case he was the fabled exception confirming the rule.
It was already known that the world was large, because of Aristarchus or whoever it was? Eretosthanes? The guy who figured out that the slanting of shadows told you how large the world was. There was also a theory that the world was round because it always cast circular shadows on the moon during eclipses.
The Pharoh Necho had sent some guy all the war around Africa, so they knew that is was possible to do it. The Romans had Britain and knew about how to build a decent sailing ship. But since Rome also controlled the Sinai they didn't need to sail around Africa or west from Spain to get to Asia. It was too easy just to trade the regular way.
The Pharoh Necho had sent some guy all the war around Africa, so they knew that is was possible to do it. The Romans had Britain and knew about how to build a decent sailing ship. But since Rome also controlled the Sinai they didn't need to sail around Africa or west from Spain to get to Asia. It was too easy just to trade the regular way.
I've got one question to go at the very start of this discussion:
How plausible is it that the Romans could have created a printing press? I'm not really familiar with the early presses and how complex they were. Was it something that an enterprising young clerk may have tinkered together, or did Gutenberg's original press require years of concerted effort?
Also, while it's been established that the Romans would have LOVED to have one if only for the ability to print out government forms, what was their mindset like in regards to these sorts of devices? Would a Roman (or any other member of a nearby empire) have been able to make the mental leaps needed to get to the press?
Just wondering how likely this situation is. Is it a case of "let's just give them this toy", or is it "man, if only the right guy had hit the right idea"?
Thanks, all.
How plausible is it that the Romans could have created a printing press? I'm not really familiar with the early presses and how complex they were. Was it something that an enterprising young clerk may have tinkered together, or did Gutenberg's original press require years of concerted effort?
Also, while it's been established that the Romans would have LOVED to have one if only for the ability to print out government forms, what was their mindset like in regards to these sorts of devices? Would a Roman (or any other member of a nearby empire) have been able to make the mental leaps needed to get to the press?
Just wondering how likely this situation is. Is it a case of "let's just give them this toy", or is it "man, if only the right guy had hit the right idea"?
Thanks, all.
Printing technologies
Hektograph. You paint on jello, basically, and press paper against it. The Romans had jellied eels, so that can be done.
Spirit duplicator. Slightly different. You use an ink that smears very well and press it against a wet piece of paper. Alcohol is used because it is volatile and dries quickly.
Woodblock printing. You carve into your woodblock or your soft stone and ink that and press against a piece of paper. Good for illustrations.
Mimeograph. Not the rotary one. The Romans couldn't have built one of those. You use linen cloth covered with wax, and scrape or type holes in the wax. That is your master and you press paper against it, when it is suspended over a very shallow pan of ink. Inky cork is a good substrate. What leaks through is your image. This is the best for making thousands of impressions.
Letterpress. The classical Gutenberg press. You use precast slugs of lead with letters or words on them. You assemble a block of type in a box and after you print your page, you take them apart and make another page out of the letters. Again, you ink them and press them to a piece of paper. Highest print quality, but you can't do images.
Hektograph. You paint on jello, basically, and press paper against it. The Romans had jellied eels, so that can be done.
Spirit duplicator. Slightly different. You use an ink that smears very well and press it against a wet piece of paper. Alcohol is used because it is volatile and dries quickly.
Woodblock printing. You carve into your woodblock or your soft stone and ink that and press against a piece of paper. Good for illustrations.
Mimeograph. Not the rotary one. The Romans couldn't have built one of those. You use linen cloth covered with wax, and scrape or type holes in the wax. That is your master and you press paper against it, when it is suspended over a very shallow pan of ink. Inky cork is a good substrate. What leaks through is your image. This is the best for making thousands of impressions.
Letterpress. The classical Gutenberg press. You use precast slugs of lead with letters or words on them. You assemble a block of type in a box and after you print your page, you take them apart and make another page out of the letters. Again, you ink them and press them to a piece of paper. Highest print quality, but you can't do images.
TriskeleGames said:
Well, we keep discovering just how much technology was around in the ancient world (it has recently been suggested that the Romans used charcoal evaporation refrigeration...), so the idea that there was an anti-technological mindest around has pretty much become indefensible. That said, even the Roman Empire was not the best place for technologies to spread and develop the same way they could in later Medieval Europe. My personal pet theory is that Rome, like China, India and Japan, was what I'd call a 'low resource, high manpower' civilisation where traditional solutions work best because they are frugal and integrated, while Europe became a high resource, low manpower civilisation where labour-saving devices were widely copied because they allowed the limited manpower to achieve more with plentiful resources. It has something to do with the comparatively lousy agricultural productivity in northern Europe prior to about 1700.
But back to the printing press: The Romans understood presses (they had various different technologies). They understood stamps and stencils. They had various type of inks and paints. So technically, a printing press was possible. What they didn't have was the commercial mindset of the middle ages. (printing had been worked on in various guises by many people because of the huge gains to be had *if you could make it work*. I don't think many Romans thought like that, so the invention would have to come from a solitary tinkerer rather than a commercial man like Gutenberg). A lesser problem would be that Rome did not widely use oil paints, and the best printing inks for moveable metal type are oil-based. I don't think that's too much of a problem, though, as Roman eyeliner and mascara were oil-based. IN the end I'd say it's nmot at all improbable that it should be invented, but it wasn't something waiting to happen, either. There was no pressing need driving the search for a solution, just dormant applications
The point about manpower is very good. As far as I am informed, the romans had sort of a newspaper. Slaves wrote it and it was put on some wall.
To accomplish a difficult device like a press, a lot of experiments are necessary. Who is about to do them? Slaves would not do it, as they are not interested in improving their masters situation moire than they did anyway.
The educated romans spent their time on more delightful tasks.
All the development of devices and procedures in roman time was less scientific, but craft-oriented.
So the romans improved building, gardening and things lilke that, but did not start or continue scientific trial and error work.
I do not swear on this. I will be delighted to be proven wrong.
To accomplish a difficult device like a press, a lot of experiments are necessary. Who is about to do them? Slaves would not do it, as they are not interested in improving their masters situation moire than they did anyway.
The educated romans spent their time on more delightful tasks.
All the development of devices and procedures in roman time was less scientific, but craft-oriented.
So the romans improved building, gardening and things lilke that, but did not start or continue scientific trial and error work.
I do not swear on this. I will be delighted to be proven wrong.