A World Without Metal

[Keenir]

ROFL

Bridges as high as a kite? Yayyy...

Seriously, though,

I am serious - the Incans used rope bridges made of grass.

we need an Industrial Revolution to raise the standard of living

avoid the creation of farming, then.

Stone is out of the question. The ability of stone to be used as tools had pretty much reached its end-point by the neolithic (in both hemispheres). Quarrying, "preforming", heat-treatment , and blade making could have been (and effectively were) "industrialized" in MesoAmerica, and elsewhere but, unlike metallurgy, stone technology would not spur many associated indistries, and stone has too few uses.

the megafauna would disagree if they were still around.

let me refer you to Nan Madol. pure rock. as were many pyramids of the world.

Iron can be alloyed and cast to fullfill all sorts of functions - obsidian can't.

true, but obsidian can fufill a lot of different functions.

sure you can't melt it and use it in other fields...but then again, aside from horses, what can?

One might consider concrete as an outgrowth, but even with its ability to be poured and cast, its use would be limited. Not too many concrete airplanes and cars.

true, but as dams and walls, its pretty good.

mass manufacture. The one possible drawback is that, unlike metal, ceramics cannot be traded except as raw materials (sand, clay, shell etc) or finished artifacts.

how is that a down side? sounds like a boon.

 

[corditeman]

An appalling sense of humour...

...Yes, I know about the magnificent Incan rope bridges.

Looking at tempered glass as a possible replacement for metal in pipework, taps and engineering. There is a possible replacement for wire in graphite-filled leads. Glass lightbulbs with carbon filaments instead of tungsten. The generation of electricity without using copper windings is something I still haven't worked out.

 

[zoomar]

the megafauna would disagree if they were still around.

let me refer you to Nan Madol. pure rock. as were many pyramids of the world.

true, but obsidian can fufill a lot of different functions.

sure you can't melt it and use it in other fields...but then again, aside from horses, what can?

true, but as dams and walls, its pretty good.
.

(1) I'm not sure how megafauna have anything to do with stone as the basis of an industrial revolution. There's no reason to believe that effective hunting and use of animal products obtained and processed by stone tools can put a culture on the road to an industrial revolution. If anything, you are then talking about an industrialization based on animal products, not the tools used to gather this product.

(2) So what if large buildings can be built solely of stone and with stone tools? Massive mounds and walls can also be built of dirt. Again, the ability of a civilization to design and build massive monuments and buildings is not related to "industrialization"

(3) My original post granted that the mass production of flint and obsidian blades by what appears to have been specialized artisan communities in certain barrios at Teotihuacan (for example) comes close to industrialization, but its probably more like the guild system in medieval europe than a true industrial revolution. It certainly didn't lead to anything more than organized craft specialization over the following 1000 years of Mesoamerican cultural evolutrion.

An "industrial revolution" has less to do with technology and craft specialization than how it restructures (revolutionizes) social and economic systems. In many respects, industrialization devalues individual craftsmanship and traditional guilds. It has to do with sea changes in how resources are found, exploited, reduced,bought, sold, and manufactured and by whom and for whom the system is maintained. I see no reason to believe that the stone working technologies of the most advanced MesoAmerican civilizations or pre-Bronze age Near Eastern civilizations would have led to an "industrial revolution" analogous to what occurred in 18th and 19th century Europe and North America with iron. If such a revolution could occur at all in the absence of metals, it would be in materials that came as close to metal in its ability and variability. And that would be ceramics and glass.

 

[Henriksson]

Can oil be extracted and refined? I imagine it would be an even more useful resource than even in our TL - I imagine that plastics, for example, would be very useful. Heck, maybe people would think twice before burning it.

 

[Henriksson]

Sorry to bump this thread again, but this topic really intrigues me. I have a question: Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Float_glass) mentions that float glass is manufactured by using metal. Can a substitute be used?

I've also been pondering about the role of the biological in this world. OTL, production of electricity was, I think, partly inspired by the electric ray, and to this day lots of discoveries are derived from animals, biomemetics and all that. Could we perhaps see a greater "taming" of biological processes, a moulding of it to fit as substitutes of processes which use metal. I don't know, I'm just throwing it out here, but could one see an organic combustion engine through genetic engineering/very heavy breeding? Obviously not as efficient as a one made with metal, but perhaps better than what other materials are available. Just an idea.

 

[Bolt451]

I like the principle of the idea but physically speaking does sound like Alien space bats took away all our metal. That said, without the metal I don't think we'd advance beyond equivalent of iron age technology, and it wouldn't be as widespread nor as quick. Thats just my assumption though, maybe the people of TTL might be much more imaginative.

Also I thought you meant that heavy metal never appeared as a musical genre until i realised it was in pre-1900

 

[The Professor]

Glass also needs to be taken into account as advancing chemistry, being a translucent chemically neutral container - assuming we can produce clear glass with stone/ceramic ovens.
Lenses are also useful in producing telescopes and microscopes. We could see an optical semaphore system develop.

With civilization having a greater demand for trees and stone we could see greater deforestation and landscape destruction with all its attendant environmental problems. Maybe landscaping and tree-farming become more popular?

 

[scourge]

Am I the only one who read this as , " A World Without Metal ,as in the sub genre of rock" ? A world without Celtic Frost , Slayer , Black Sabbath , Motorhead , etc is a world I can't imagine.

 

[Henriksson]

Glass also needs to be taken into account as advancing chemistry, being a translucent chemically neutral container - assuming we can produce clear glass with stone/ceramic ovens.
Lenses are also useful in producing telescopes and microscopes. We could see an optical semaphore system develop.

As regards glass, there's one thing in OTL which is quite interesting. Glasses is in particular are interesting because, while practically all other great civilizations (in the Old World) knew about the wheel, gunpowder, the watch, glasses seem to have been an exclusively European invention. When they spread over the world in the 17th century it was only in the form of import.

This inability to produce glasses reflects how, while they know how to work glass, they didn't harness its full potentials. There are conventionally five functions of glass:

Verrotorie - Decoration or toy, where glass was used as a very cheap gemstone. The only one used in India for about 2000 years. Glass of this kind is simple, and doesn't even require developing glass-blowing.

Verrerie - As a container, especially for liquids of different kinds; this function is more exclusive, not the least because it demands more developed technology. It's interesting that in China they really did make containers of this kind, but it didn't really have any true breakthrough, because they preferred to use porcelain, which filled the same function and which they had mastered to near perfection.

Mirrors - were only developed in Europe and parts of the Arabic world.

Vitrage - protective yet transparent material for windows; this is something for a long time in Europe only spotted north of the Alps, obviously due to the climate - this would explain why the Chinese, but neither the Arabs nor the Indians, actually tried to make windows.

The fifth and last function is lenses, which is what makes things such as binoculars, microscopes and telescopes possible. And it has only arisen in Europe.

So, I guess a civilization living in an area with crappy weather, a dislike of ceramics as containers and a vain culture which reads a lot would be a best bet in progressing glass techniques faster.

I guess that maybe with no metal around the obsession with metal found in alchemics could instead be turned towards glass? In any case, I believe that microscopes and telescopes are inducive towards a more scientific worlview because it allows people to the vast scope of the world, both on a small and a large scale.

Since semaphore towers seem to pop up a bit in "How to make the Roman empire survive" thread, I find them... cool.

With civilization having a greater demand for trees and stone we could see greater deforestation and landscape destruction with all its attendant environmental problems. Maybe landscaping and tree-farming become more popular?

I'm not too sure about that - producing steel requires a whole deal of charcoal, after all. And while the demands of the steel industry seemed to outpace the available forests for a while, the OTL solution wasn't to care more for forests - it was to dig up coal to burn instead.

 

[reformedcpmuser]

(3) My original post granted that the mass production of flint and obsidian blades by what appears to have been specialized artisan communities in certain barrios at Teotihuacan (for example) comes close to industrialization, but its probably more like the guild system in medieval europe than a true industrial revolution. It certainly didn't lead to anything more than organized craft specialization over the following 1000 years of Mesoamerican cultural evolutrion.

First off, a team of surgeons a few decades ago successfully performed invasive surgery using Mesoamerican-style obsidian scalpels and lancets only. The surgery and post-op were very successful. The surgeons reported that obsidian was a much easier to use and sharper tool than an aluminum scalpel.

It's pretty Eurocentric to think that a society that has not advanced beyond guild manufacture of "stone age" flaked knives is not a complex society. At the height of Aztec society, before the 16th century conquest, Aztec priests were able to use craft-made obsidian blades to swiftly vivisect human hearts. The Aztecs probably had no need for metal or an "industrial revolution", as their society was (somewhat) demographically stable in the century before the Spanish Conquest. I'm highly skeptical that the Aztecs would have needed obsidian factories to perpetuate both their state rituals, agriculture, and domestic life.

 

[Henriksson]

I'm wondering how warfare would be different in this world. I'm guessing horse and bow would be king, since I guess weaponry that requires (or are much better with) metal would be much less practical (swords, muskets, rifles etc.) It would be really cool to imagine the Greek polis, but with longbowmen instead of hoplites.

In the lack of such rare and durable materials such as gold and silver, it's interesting to ponder how currency would be like. Possibly there would be more emphasis on barter, with really useful goods like salt or exotic ones such as furs etc. has more importance. Perhaps we'd see a quicker adoption of paper currency. I imagine that would encourage innovation of more complex printing, to curb counter-feiters.

First off, a team of surgeons a few decades ago successfully performed invasive surgery using Mesoamerican-style obsidian scalpels and lancets only. The surgery and post-op were very successful. The surgeons reported that obsidian was a much easier to use and sharper tool than an aluminum scalpel.

It's pretty Eurocentric to think that a society that has not advanced beyond guild manufacture of "stone age" flaked knives is not a complex society. At the height of Aztec society, before the 16th century conquest, Aztec priests were able to use craft-made obsidian blades to swiftly vivisect human hearts. The Aztecs probably had no need for metal or an "industrial revolution", as their society was (somewhat) demographically stable in the century before the Spanish Conquest. I'm highly skeptical that the Aztecs would have needed obsidian factories to perpetuate both their state rituals, agriculture, and domestic life.

One musn't forget that the Mesoamerican were really boxed in: Desert to the north and jungles to the south. The Incas and the Mississippian cultures were like a world away There was also the problem with corn, which caused soil erosion to a greater degree - this lead to Mesoamerican cultures falling, and some other culture to rise in their stead. This made continuity difficult.

What I'm saying is that it's pretty misleading to give the Aztecs as an example of how a non-metallic culture in Eurasia would look like (if that's what you're saying). Eurasia has the advantage of a larger number of useful species available, and all the different cultures fitting there will put pressure on each other to innovate, and encourage technological diffusion.

You're quite right in that the Aztecs were quite complex, with little incentive to move towards an industrial revolution. Tenochtitlan was grander than many contemporary European cities, after all.

(Do obsidian factories actually work in reality? I thought it was only a cool but implausible feature of Dwarf Fortress and Minecraft.)

 

[wietze]

As for another novel about a planet where metal is rather difficult to find:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Blue_World

 

[Malta]

In the "Riverworld" series essentially major kingdoms fight over one kingdom chaired by Mark Twain which set up around the only source of metal on the world-A Crashed Asteroid.

 

[Analytical Engine]

In the "Riverworld" series essentially major kingdoms fight over one kingdom chaired by Mark Twain which set up around the only source of metal on the world-A Crashed Asteroid.

I've never read the series, but in the (not terribly good) film, there was some metal-based power source that was used by the people of an alien that was stuck on Earth prior to humanity being brought to Riverworld.

 

[Henriksson]

I'm pondering what sorts of tool of war would be used in this world.

Most pre-gunpowder ranged weapons are still useable, such as bows, longbows, crossbows, slings, javelins etc.

Melee weapons are less useful, as there is no good replacement for the simultaneous sharpness and durability of metal. The next best alternative might be obsidian, but I have little idea about the historical obsidian sources in the world.

Given lack of sharpness, an alternative might be the application of sheer force with sledgehammers. There's also whips, but they're really quite useless as a weapon, because even with practice they're hard to ensnare opponents as such with - perhaps it has more use as a "terror" weapon aimed at routing opponents. Spears also seem to be somewhat useful even without metal.

There is also bare-handed combat, with martial arts and the like. I have difficult to imagine how martial arts might be used in large-scale warfare. It takes long practice to become fully proficient in it. Perhaps it might see more use as a tool to uphold law and order.

There are also animals of different kinds which can be used. The difficulty, as OTL, is of course that only a few can be domesticated.

Horses

The unholy creature of power projection, I imagine they will still have a crucial role in warfare in the metal-less world. While light cavalry is less useful, and I think heavy cavalry doesn't even exist, they're going to be good nevertheless in a world with greater emphasis on ranged warfare. A horse can trample enemies to some extent, and riders could perhaps use whips.

Elephants

Elephants in antiquity were typically caught in the wild and when tamed. Though it has quite some protection from arrows owing to its tough hide, they are hard to use in battle. They can be devastating to an army with no experience of elephants, but their usefulness decreases with better tactics on part of the opponents.

Presumably an established, rich state can be able to breed elephants for warfare and other things better.

Dogs

I believe that dogs would see more use in war in this world, because of less good armour and melee weapons. They're pretty fast, are intimidating and can be ruthless in striking an opponent down. They've been used in seperate batallions in antiquity.

Bees

An article on the use of apiculture in warfare can be found here: http://www.beekeeping.com/articles/us/war_bees.htm I could definitely see bees having a larger role in warfare, especially if a particularly aggressive breed can be put forth.

The most interesting factor must surely be that of a gunpowder, to be precise the limited use of gunpowder because it's hard to build guns or cannons which aren't made out of metal. It would be exciting to see political, economical and social sectors develop without gunpowder being the basis of warfare.