Medieval Bicycle

Could something like a bicycle be developped in the Middle Ages? And what would be the consequences?

First of all, a means of transport as fast as a bike would mean a huge increase in economic opportunities (i.e. detail trade) for the humble man.
Of course, there would be no rubber tyres, just wooden wheels, perhaps with a iron hoop around (Most blacksmiths would be able to provide those, as one could easily use the same type as used for barrels). Your back won't love that, but for most people, life is harder without transport ...

Second, somewhat decent ways to cycle along. But at least in relatively flat areas, there must have been plenty of paths with firm ground due to frequent (foot) usage.

OK, pedals, chain, and cogwheels depend on some mechanical engineering.
But what about Draisine type of device?

That would be of a lot of help, too. Moreover, I am phantasizing about two short cross-bars on the front wheel where you can pedal "direcltly", without gear and transmission. Also no walk in the park, but it might still solve many people's problems.


So what do you think? Would that be possible?
And why didn't it happen?
 
I'm gonna have to say no, as metals were very expensive back then, and no one would waste them on something as silly looking as a bicycle. Not to mention the nobles had the much more reliable and "masterful" horse, which would lead them to spurn any prototype brought forth. This is assuming the high-middle ages, of course. I could see it appearing in the late 1400s, as the Medieval Era ended, but not before that. If you're going to bring up wood, it would NOT work for the simple reason of wooden "bike chains" being very flimsy and easy to break.
 

Wolfpaw

Banned
Didn't China have cheap, affordable largely wooden bicycles around this time? I can't precisely recall. If they do, mayhaps the idea could make its way to Europe early on.
 
The earliest POSSIBLE records go back to 1493, and that's been claimed to be a fraud. The Draisine actually only appeared in 1818... I still just can't really see this kind of thing going through. It's all about resources, and remember: bicycles were NOT cheap when they first came out. The peasants would be too poor to afford them, the church would see it as trying to outdo God's creation the horse, and the nobles would laugh at it.

Kinda said, because "Gaze upon mine self, mother! I am maneuvring this two-wheeled machine without the use of my hands!" would surely ring through history forever.
 
There's also a problem in that very few people needed to travel more than a short walk's distance in this era. Those who did broadly fell into three categories: nobles, who had the faster, safer, cheaper and more reliable horses; merchants, who wouldn't be able to carry their goods on a bike, and common folk doing a rare long journey for a reason such as a pilgrimage. The third category might be interested in the invention, but might not be able to afford it and might find that over a long journey it caused noticeable health problems i.e. back pains, and weren't a big minority anyway. Many people never left their village or town their whole lives. There's not a big market.

Still, an interesting and novel idea.
 
The Congo wood bike:

wooden-bike.jpg
wooden-bike-race1.jpg
wooden-bike-race2.jpg
wooden_bike2.jpg
 
Thrice No, I'm afraid.

No because in order to be reliable and durable, a bicycle needs a few high-quality metal parts. Not a lot, but you'll need, at a minimum, metal axles and bearings. A pushbike/draisione can sort-of-do without, but only if it is designed for short-range use and then it takes much more effort than walking. In order to build a bicycle that lives up to its modern potential, you need high-grade steel ball bearings to keep down the friction and a high-precision metal transmission (imagine trying to forge a bicycle chain- just imagine). The frame and wheels *could* bne made of wood, but it isn't a very good idea. Useful bicycles were late-19th century bleeding edge technology, not a toy someone came up with in his spare time.

No because in order to be useful, a bicycle needs roads. Not necessarily tarmac roads (though if you've ever ridden on dirt paths you'll appreciate them), but roads that are reasonably level. A bike lives on momentum. In most of medieval Europe, momentum ends with the next puddle. A bike that can deal with off-road terrain is a novel idea and took late-twentieth century technology to get it to work.

No because the mearest approximation you could build would still be veryexpensive. Wheels and bearings were beyond the ability of most people to make and maintain (wheelwright was a skilled job), and the demands of lightness and durability made of the frame means it will take highly skilled craftsmen and top-quality hardwood and metal to make one. At which point a donkey is probably going to be cheaper. Plus, you can make a donkey into salami after it collapses.

Now, a useful long-range wheelbarrow may be a very different proposition.
 
Thanks for all your comments.

There's also a problem in that very few people needed to travel more than a short walk's distance in this era. Those who did broadly fell into three categories: nobles, who had the faster, safer, cheaper and more reliable horses; merchants, who wouldn't be able to carry their goods on a bike, and common folk doing a rare long journey for a reason such as a pilgrimage.

This is largely correct; although I'd rather say "most people usually only travelled long and exhausting distances which were just manageable on foot".

I can see at least the following interesting applications nevertheless, not too alien to the whole situation:


  • Errands to the princely/episcopal administration in the city (necessary on a regular basis, take much longer on foot, and sometimes it may be desirable to get an official advice/order more frequently);
  • Opportunity to buy something (clothes, or small objects) on a market in a nearby town.


No because in order to be useful, a bicycle needs roads. Not necessarily tarmac roads (though if you've ever ridden on dirt paths you'll appreciate them), but roads that are reasonably level. A bike lives on momentum. In most of medieval Europe, momentum ends with the next puddle. A bike that can deal with off-road terrain is a novel idea and took late-twentieth century technology to get it to work.

I thought that as the biggest obstacle.

Now, a useful long-range wheelbarrow may be a very different proposition.

The word combination "long-range whellbarrow" alone is price-less ...
 
There's also a problem in that very few people needed to travel more than a short walk's distance in this era.

Quite. Due to having the necessary road infrastructure, people that would find them useful (military), and other things, the Romans would be more appreciative of the bicycle.
 
*
No because in order to be reliable and durable, a bicycle needs a few high-quality metal parts. Not a lot, but you'll need, at a minimum, metal axles and bearings. A pushbike/draisione can sort-of-do without, but only if it is designed for short-range use and then it takes much more effort than walking. In order to build a bicycle that lives up to its modern potential, you need high-grade steel ball bearings to keep down the friction and a high-precision metal transmission (imagine trying to forge a bicycle chain- just imagine). The frame and wheels *could* bne made of wood, but it isn't a very good idea. Useful bicycles were late-19th century bleeding edge technology, not a toy someone came up with in his spare time.

...
No because the mearest approximation you could build would still be veryexpensive. Wheels and bearings were beyond the ability of most people to make and maintain (wheelwright was a skilled job), and the demands of lightness and durability made of the frame means it will take highly skilled craftsmen and top-quality hardwood and metal to make one. At which point a donkey is probably going to be cheaper. Plus, you can make a donkey into salami after it collapses.
What he said.

Bicycles were very high tech items when they first came out. If you don't have GOOD metal bearings and races then the bicycle has no advantage over walking.

Roads are theoretically possible earlier. Some variant on a Roman road, for instance. If you introduce sufficient metallurgy that early, though, you've completely changed history so that bicycles are drop in the bucket.
 
On yer bike, mate!

When studying her family tree, my wife and myself discovered that her Dye ancestors married the next village along - about two to three hours' walk. Apropos of which, there's a joke that the bicycle saved rural Norfolk from inbreeding....ROFL:D

(Seriously, from Castle Acre to King's Lynn over two hundred years, with a detour to Durham during the 1830s coal rush)

The key to a bicycle in iron and steel is the ability to roll rod, bar and sheet iron and steel, plus the lathe skills of someone like Joseph Bramah. That limits you to a technical era. You could get round the bearing problem using Babbit metal bearings (tin or lead alloy poured bearings - look it up on dear old Wiki!).

And of course a sensible Scot called the devil on wheels:p Look up Kirkpatrick MacMillan on http://www3.sympatico.ca/comflex/mcmillan/DevilonWheels.htm
 
Top