WI:A Roman Blast furnaces

At first I was going to ask about what the impact of the slow evolution of gunpowder in Europe would have been had it been discovered in the 5th century in the ERE; just as I was about to post the question I was like "What if the Romans invented paper?" and was ready to open up a thread on the impact on Europe if the Eastern Romans did in the 5th or 6th century what Cai Lun did in the 2nd. I started to look up Chinese inventions and increasingly wondered what would be the impact on Europe if many of them had been independently invented, and then I came across the Blast furnace. So my question is what would be the impact on the Roman world if the Blast Furnace had been independently invented by the Romans in the 5th century?
 
The main problem here isn't much the powder than the situation of metallurgy. Neither Byzantium or western Europeans had the technology to make efficient cannons, guns or anything.

Basing on OTL, you'll have to wait maybe 2 centuries (probably longer with this earlier introduction) to have efficient weapons. And when I say efficient weapons, I mean mainly psychological at first.
 
The main problem here isn't much the powder than the situation of metallurgy. Neither Byzantium or western Europeans had the technology to make efficient cannons, guns or anything.

Basing on OTL, you'll have to wait maybe 2 centuries (probably longer with this earlier introduction) to have efficient weapons. And when I say efficient weapons, I mean mainly psychological at first.

I understand that the slow evolution of gunpowder would mean that Byzantines aren't going to be firing muskets, rather it would probably follow a course similar to what happened with gunpowder in China. While I had originally intended this thread to be about gunpowder, I'm mostly asking, "What the impact on Europe is if the blast furnace was invented by Byzantium?"
 
The problem isn't the output or the quality of minerals. It's the working of iron that's an issue.

The roman metallurgy produced really diverse quality items, some really good (more because good materials than actual systematized practice) and the majority not that good.

Even the better iron work of Romans (or Franks, for instance, that had probably the better mettalurgy of Early Middle-Ages) couldn't have been enough to craft guns, cannons or anything useful with powder.

It's all about a theorical knowledge, you can't just use iron and forge a gun.
And everybody ignored this knowledge, and as the OP state this is only the invention of Black Furnace, I'm not sure it would be enough for that.
Granted, it could help...But needs a lot of other things.
 
I understand that the slow evolution of gunpowder would mean that Byzantines aren't going to be firing muskets, rather it would probably follow a course similar to what happened with gunpowder in China.
I didn't even dream of muskets, more about couleuvrines for a start :D

While I had originally intended this thread to be about gunpowder, I'm mostly asking, "What the impact on Europe is if the blast furnace was invented by Byzantium?"

For the black furnace itself...I would rather suggest an earlier use of catalan forge (sorry . no English article). It was clearly better than the other bloomeries, even if not as good than BF, and probably better adapted to Byzantium production.

Black Furnace seems to me require a more centralised and intense production, more important needs, and a larger extraction.

EDIT : I found this in english, maybe more clear if not reallt detailed. With the discussion.

Not really what you asked for, but I hope it would help.
 
Last edited:
I think a more interesting result of roman blast furnaces would come from cheap iron ax's, picks, and plows.

I really want to examine this change. I'm trying to find research material as I'm flirting with the idea of a TL based around this concept, but so fare my local library and even my college library don't have very much information.
 
Top