AHC:Fastest possible industrial revolution

  • Thread starter Deleted member 67076
  • Start date
I want to give a shout out to my girl Persia. WI Persia had conquered Greece and absorbed Greek thought and Science. A thousand year Persia that had access to Chinese Paper, Egyptian Glass, and Western Thought could have done it IMHO. Particularly if it split into 2 more sustainable empires.
 
As a Romanophile, I can't help pointing out that I feel Rome would have been a very good candidate for early industrialization. They had a large middle class and a high opinion of technology in general, and were already responsible for a great deal of developement in mills. As for natural resources, their empire contained England, France, half of Germany, Bulgaria, and Turkey, all of which contain a wealth of one or more of the nessessary resources. I believe that they were also aware of steampower, though they never put it to practicall use, and their government was so military heavy that, under the right leadership, military resources alone coud spur the advancement, if only to produce metal tools and armors en masse.
 
As a Romanophile, I can't help pointing out that I feel Rome would have been a very good candidate for early industrialization. They had a large middle class and a high opinion of technology in general, and were already responsible for a great deal of developement in mills. As for natural resources, their empire contained England, France, half of Germany, Bulgaria, and Turkey, all of which contain a wealth of one or more of the nessessary resources. I believe that they were also aware of steampower, though they never put it to practicall use, and their government was so military heavy that, under the right leadership, military resources alone coud spur the advancement, if only to produce metal tools and armors en masse.


I agree. What Rome needed was paper and internal competition. I have been on record saying that I think Rome would have lasted another 500 years if it had broken into more manageable, warring chunks during the 300's, A Gallic Roman Empire, Italian Roman Empire, Spanish Roman Empire and Eastern Empire in constant competition might have re-sharpened the Roman edge. The barbarians would be easier to keep out as each Roman Empire would have a shorter frontier and would not have to fight such a confusing mixture of Barbarians. If Rome had endered the enlightenment and then the industrial revolution we might have seen say a Gallic Roman Empire astronaught landing on the moon by 1200!!
 

Deleted member 67076

I agree. What Rome needed was paper and internal competition. I have been on record saying that I think Rome would have lasted another 500 years if it had broken into more manageable, warring chunks during the 300's, A Gallic Roman Empire, Italian Roman Empire, Spanish Roman Empire and Eastern Empire in constant competition might have re-sharpened the Roman edge. The barbarians would be easier to keep out as each Roman Empire would have a shorter frontier and would not have to fight such a confusing mixture of Barbarians. If Rome had endered the enlightenment and then the industrial revolution we might have seen say a Gallic Roman Empire astronaught landing on the moon by 1200!!
That's a Turtledove TL right there!
 
That's a Turtledove TL right there!

In the sense of being completely implausible, I agree.

The idea that a more divided Roman Empire, with each part being even weaker than the OTL WRE and probably at odds with each other, would be better off vs. the barbarians because any given chunk's frontier is shorter . . .

I can only wonder if that's serious.
 
Well I was reading about the Industrial Revolution and the two things that stood out as necessary were

1) a steam engine that was efficient, ie didn't use 4/5 of its output to reheat the cylinder each time

2) a way to make iron using coal

The book I was reading seemed to say these were the main points

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 

Flubber

Banned
Well I was reading about the Industrial Revolution and the two things that stood out as necessary were...


And some sort of patent system. Inventors need to profit from their work and need to be able to plan on profiting from their work.
 
And some sort of patent system. Inventors need to profit from their work and need to be able to plan on profiting from their work.

.... and a scientific background similar to that fostered by the age of enlightenment. If people could only explain something as "magic" then I would say that an industrial age is still many years away.

We would need a Roman / Persian / Chinese version of: Newton, Voltare, Adam Smith, Benjamin Franklin etc.
 
Top