+- RomanArmyTalk (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat)
+-- Forum: Research Arena (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Forum: Roman Military History & Archaeology (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/forumdisplay.php?fid=8)
+--- Thread: Lack of technological progress in late Roman Empire (/showthread.php?tid=5521)
Re: Lack of technological progress in late Roman Empire - Eleatic Guest - 05-17-2006
I heard there is an article by a certain Kevin Green in JSTOR on the subject, but unfortunately I have no access to JSTOR nor do I even know the exact name of the article. Someone can help?
Re: Lack of technological progress in late Roman Empire - D B Campbell - 05-17-2006
I haven't kept up-to-date with Kevin Greene's work, but I can give you one reference:
"Perspectives on Roman technology", Oxford Journal of Archaeology 9 (1990), 209-219
Don't know if that helps?
Re: Lack of technological progress in late Roman Empire - conon394 - 05-17-2006
Eleatic Guest
Do you mean this one?
"Technological Innovation and Economic Progress in the Ancient World: M. I. Finley Re-Considered" Kevin Greene
The Economic History Review, New Series, Vol. 53, No. 1 (Feb., 2000), pp. 29-59
You might also this article interesting
"Machines, Power and the Ancient Economy" Andrew Wilson
The Journal of Roman Studies, Vol. 92 (2002), pp. 1-32
I have them in pdf form, if you want I can mail them to you.
Personally, my favorite article that I have read recently in the recent trend reassessing the 'stagnate classical world" is this one:
"The Origins of the Wheelbarrow" M. J. T. Lewis
Technology and Culture > Vol. 35, No. 3 (Jul., 1994), pp. 453-475
Lewis concludes that Athens beat China to the invention of the wheelbarrow.
Re: Lack of technological progress in late Roman Empire - Carlton Bach - 05-17-2006
Quote:Eleatic Guest
Do you mean this one?
"Technological Innovation and Economic Progress in the Ancient World: M. I. Finley Re-Considered" Kevin Greene
The Economic History Review, New Series, Vol. 53, No. 1 (Feb., 2000), pp. 29-59
You might also this article interesting
"Machines, Power and the Ancient Economy" Andrew Wilson
The Journal of Roman Studies, Vol. 92 (2002), pp. 1-32
I have them in pdf form, if you want I can mail them to you.
If you don't mind, I'd like them very much. I missed those.
carlton_bachATyahooDOTde
Thanks
Re: Lack of technological progress in late Roman Empire - Eleatic Guest - 05-17-2006
D B Campbell,
it certainly helps!
Re: Lack of technological progress in late Roman Empire - conon394 - 05-17-2006
Eleatic Guest
Touching back on your original post: What makes you say the evidence for Lateen sails is shaky?
Casson cites evidence to put both Lateen and Sprit sails as early as the 2nd century (“Ships and Seamanship in the Ancient Worldâ€
Re: Lack of technological progress in late Roman Empire - Eleatic Guest - 05-18-2006
Quote:I sent the pdfs you should have them by now.
Thanks a lot!
conon394\\n[quote]Eleatic Guest
Touching back on your original post: What makes you say the evidence for Lateen sails is shaky?
Casson cites evidence to put both Lateen and Sprit sails as early as the 2nd century (“Ships and Seamanship in the Ancient Worldâ€
Re: Lack of technological progress in late Roman Empire - Primitivus - 05-19-2006
Quote:I have them in pdf form, if you want I can mail them to you.I'd be interested in receiving copies of them also. Thanks.
Re: Lack of technological progress in late Roman Empire - Endre Fodstad - 05-19-2006
As would I...
(lurker, but interested in the subject)
roman contributions - Goffredo - 05-19-2006
People make easy distinctions between romans and provincial citizens.
Most people make little distinctions between arabs and islamics.
Questions:
1) Does the notion of "roman contributions" mean that we are to list things invented by those born in Rome city, or we are to include areas around Rome, or maybe people of roman origin, or people not of roman stock but roman citizens from itlay and more distant provinces,...
2) If an invention was made in some hellenistic province, in some punic province, in syria, or in gaul, do we quickly say "Ah it was a local contribution, not a roman one".
3) Does the notion of "islamic contributions" mean that we are to lists contributions of just the Arabs or more reasonably it means from any islamic living in the world of Islam?
4) If an invention was made in Spain, Syria, Iran, Egypt, Sicily do we go and say "Ah it was an Islamic contribution".
Re: roman contributions - Carlton Bach - 05-19-2006
Quote:People make easy distinctions between romans and provincial citizens.
Most people make little distinctions between arabs and islamics.
Questions:
1) Does the notion of "roman contributions" mean that we are to list things invented by those born in Rome city, or we are to include areas around Rome, or maybe people of roman origin, or people not of roman stock but roman citizens from itlay and more distant provinces,...
2) If an invention was made in some hellenistic province, in some punic province, in syria, or in gaul, do we quickly say "Ah it was a local contribution, not a roman one".
3) Does the notion of "islamic contributions" mean that we are to lists contributions of just the Arabs or more reasonably it means from any islamic living in the world of Islam?
4) If an invention was made in Spain, Syria, Iran, Egypt, Sicily do we go and say "Ah it was an Islamic contribution".
ASk the Iranians about that someday :twisted:
No, really. For some reason, many modern writers and teachers buy into the Roman self-image of born conquerors and administrators that leave technology or arts to lesser breeds. It gets quite annoying at times. Now, as far as I am concerned any innovation that originates anywhere within the Roman-ruled world is 'Roman', It still leaves a limited number, compared to the red-hot era of innovation that preceded them, but why count them down artificially?
(Yes, my professors were 'minimalists', too)
Re: roman contributions - tlclark - 05-19-2006
Quote:ASk the Iranians about that someday :twisted:
No, really. For some reason, many modern writers and teachers buy into the Roman self-image of born conquerors and administrators that leave technology or arts to lesser breeds. It gets quite annoying at times. Now, as far as I am concerned any innovation that originates anywhere within the Roman-ruled world is 'Roman', It still leaves a limited number, compared to the red-hot era of innovation that preceded them, but why count them down artificially?
(Yes, my professors were 'minimalists', too)
Art history is full of terms; Neo-Attic, Anachronizing, Lydian, Pergamene, Aphrodisian, etc. whose only purpose seems to be to separate Romans from any credit for their invention or innovation in those forms of art. Hence the emphasis on Romans as engineers and builders, but not artists.
It's rather frustrating, and Pliny's compliance with the conspiracy certainly doesn't help.
Travis
Re: roman contributions - Robert Vermaat - 05-19-2006
Quote:People make easy distinctions between romans and provincial citizens.
Most people make little distinctions between arabs and islamics.
Questions:
1) Does the notion of "roman contributions" mean that we are to list things invented by those born in Rome city, or we are to include areas around Rome, or maybe people of roman origin, or people not of roman stock but roman citizens from itlay and more distant provinces,...
2) If an invention was made in some hellenistic province, in some punic province, in syria, or in gaul, do we quickly say "Ah it was a local contribution, not a roman one".
3) Does the notion of "islamic contributions" mean that we are to lists contributions of just the Arabs or more reasonably it means from any islamic living in the world of Islam?
4) If an invention was made in Spain, Syria, Iran, Egypt, Sicily do we go and say "Ah it was an Islamic contribution".
Well, I agree that there's no difference between 'Arab' and 'Islamic', when it comes to inventures at least.
I would not say that 'Roman' and 'provincial Roman' carries a big distinction, but somehow there seems to be a difference between 'Roman' and 'Greek', even if that means 'Romano-Greek' or 'eastern Roman'. Gallic inventions are Roman, Syriac inventions are Greek.
Re: Lack of technological progress in late Roman Empire - Nathan Ross - 05-19-2006
Quote:It's rather frustrating, and Pliny's compliance with the conspiracy certainly doesn't help.
Certainly not - but might not the Romans themselves have started the 'conspiracy' in the first place? The idea of the Roman Genius as inherently practical, adapted for governance, law, administration and military affairs, as opposed to the flighty arty Greeks, whose creative genius was harnessed and commanded by Rome, seems to accord so fully with the Roman self-image that I'm sure they did all they could to propagate it. Roman culture - upper-class culture, at any rate, senatorial or imperial - seems to have actively looked down on the creative arts (aside from poetry, of course) as somewhat undignified - remember Cicero lambasting Verres for lurking in his metalwork shop 'like a Greek'. The same, perhaps, goes for technological advances - the cultured Roman, from Cicero to Vegetius, affected to despise innovation of all sorts and long for the glories of the past; easy then to ascribe what innovation did occur to the work, or the influence, of the subjegated Greeks...
- Nathan
Re: Lack of technological progress in late Roman Empire - tlclark - 05-20-2006
Quote:Quote:It's rather frustrating, and Pliny's compliance with the conspiracy certainly doesn't help.
Certainly not - but might not the Romans themselves have started the 'conspiracy' in the first place? The idea of the Roman Genius as inherently practical, adapted for governance, law, administration and military affairs, as opposed to the flighty arty Greeks, whose creative genius was harnessed and commanded by Rome, seems to accord so fully with the Roman self-image that I'm sure they did all they could to propagate it. Roman culture - upper-class culture, at any rate, senatorial or imperial - seems to have actively looked down on the creative arts (aside from poetry, of course) as somewhat undignified - remember Cicero lambasting Verres for lurking in his metalwork shop 'like a Greek'. The same, perhaps, goes for technological advances - the cultured Roman, from Cicero to Vegetius, affected to despise innovation of all sorts and long for the glories of the past; easy then to ascribe what innovation did occur to the work, or the influence, of the subjegated Greeks...
- Nathan
Well put.
This is in many ways like the American self-ethos. We shun effeteness, refinement and collectivism and encourage rugged individualism. There is a decided anti-intellectual strain in this country. Consider the whole "pull yourself up by your bootstraps" identity. Many a great american in the 19th C. was born into wealth, culture, privilege, but most painted themselves as poor, lower class, simple folk that made good.
For example - not to interject politics into this - but both Bill Clinton's and Bush's southern accents get thicker when they know the camera's are rolling. My family was from west texas, my uncle from Arkansas. I know what both accents sound like. Laura Bush's accent is pure west Texas. W's is a mish-mash of various southern dialects, most far removed from true West Texas. The same is true of Bill. Notice especially that none of W's brothers speak with a southern accent at all.
The Romans view of themselves as "the world's administrators" may not have inspired us, as we value individuality and personal creativity and homespun accents, but then they have the right to choose it their own view of their accomplishments.
Travis