Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-01T01:03:45.091Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Technological Weakness of the Ancient World

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 January 2009

David W. Reece
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

One of the major puzzles in the history of the Graeco-Roman world lies in the great discrepancy between its considerable achievements in art, in literature, in philosophy, in mathematics, and in medicine, and its very marked backwardness in most branches of technology. This is less surprising where the Romans are concerned, since, for all their admirable qualities in other directions, they were not a conspicuously original or inventive people. Even in those spheres in which they most excelled, the arts of government and warfare, they made few contributions of their own, and their strength lay rather in their skill at adapting to their own purposes the bright ideas of other men. It is significant that those two simple but important aids to improved horsemanship and cavalry tactics, the saddle and the stirrup, were not invented by the Romans, nor indeed by the Greeks, but by the nomadic tribes that pressed in on the Roman empire from the third century A.d. onwards. But with the Greeks the case is different. They were a highly intelligent people, gifted with a degree of inquisitiveness which made them unwilling to accept without question the outward appearance of the world in which they lived. Consequently in mathematics and certain branches of pure science they were able to make quite astonishing progress. But these intellectual advances were not accompanied by any marked degree of technological improvement. While Eratosthenes in Alexandria was calculating the circumference of the earth, and obtaining a figure that was less than i per cent short of the real one, the world around him was still more or less at the same technical level as it had been since the end of the Bronze Age. This contrast between theoretical brilliance and practical incompetence is great and dramatic, and it is the purpose of this paper to suggest some of the reasons why it existed.

Type
Research Article
Information
Greece & Rome , Volume 16 , Issue 1 , April 1969 , pp. 32 - 47
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 1969

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 33 note 1 Rostow, W. W., The Stages of Economic Growth (Cambridge, 1960), 19Google Scholar. Cf. Lewis, W. Arthur, The Theory of Economic Growth (London, 1955), 23 f.Google Scholar

page 33 note 2 Rostow, , op. cit. 36 fGoogle Scholar. (over 10 per cent); Lewis, , op. cit. 201–303Google Scholar (12 per cent or more). That a lower figure than these might be sufficient is suggested by the discussion of investment rates in Britain in the eighteenth century by Deane, P. and Cole, W. A., British Economic Growth, 1688–1959 (Cambridge, 1962), 259 f.Google Scholar, where the authors put forward the view that the investment rate did not exceed 7 per cent until after the end of the eighteenth century, and did not reach 10 per cent until about the middle of the nineteenth century, when industrialization was already well under way.

page 33 note 3 Lewis, , op. cit. 72–4 and chap. vi.Google Scholar

page 33 note 4 Rostow, , op. cit. 21–4.Google Scholar

page 35 note 1 On this point see the interesting comments of Lewis, op. cit. 107–13.

page 35 note 2 For the number of slaves in Athens see Jones, A. H. M., Athenian Democracy (Oxford, 1957), 16–17 and 76–9Google Scholar, and Westermann, W. L. in Finley, M. I. (ed.), Slavery in Classical Antiquity (Cambridge, 1960), 73–92Google Scholar. For the view that slavery was not a major cause of technological backwardness cf. Edelstein, L. in Jour. of the Hist, of Ideas, 13 (1952), 573 f.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

page 36 note 1 Edelstein, , loc. cit. 574–6.Google Scholar

page 36 note 2 Lewis, , op. cit. 236.Google Scholar

page 37 note 1 It is true that in the last third of the fifth century the Athenian state borrowed large sums from the treasures of the goddess Athena at a rate slightly higher than 6 per cent per annum (reduced to 1 per cent in 426/5 B.c.), for which cf. Tod, M. N., Greek Historical Inscriptions, vol. i (2nd ed., Oxford, 1946), no. 64, pp. 137 fGoogle Scholar. But this was in effect the Athenian state borrowing from itself, and consequently it is not evidence for the rate of interest obtainable on the open market at this date.

page 38 note 1 Ashton, T. S., The Industrial Revolution, 1760–1830 (London, 1948), 9–11.Google Scholar

page 39 note 1 Bennett, M. K., ‘British Wheat Yield per Acre for Seven Centuries’, in Econ. Hist. 3 (1934–1937). 12 fGoogle Scholar. It may be added that the Roman figures also compare quite favourably with those of some Mediterranean and other countries in modern times, as is shown by the following table (the figures are averages for the years 1949 to 1957, unless otherwise stated):

(These figures have been adapted from White, K. D., ‘Wheat-Farming in Roman Times’, in Antiquity, 37 (1963), 207 f.)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. The scanty evidence that survives for production per unit of labour suggests that viewed from this angle also Roman farmers were generally no less efficient than those of Britain before 1800 and of those modern countries where agriculture still relies mainly or wholly on manual labour (cf. White, K. D., ‘The Productivity of Labour in Roman Agriculture’, in Antiquity, 39 (1965), 102 f.).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

page 39 note 2 This seems to be the only possible conclusion from the detailed discussion by Jardé, A., Les Céréales dans l'antiquité grecque (Paris, 1925), 31–60Google Scholar. French, A., Growth of the Athenian Economy (London, 1964), 19–20Google Scholar, estimates that early in the sixth century B.c. the yield of wheat in Attica was only 8 bushels per acre, but his calculation is to some extent speculative.

page 40 note 1 There were of course some exceptions, e.g. Domitius Afer (consul in A.d. 39), whose large fortune was derived in part from investment in extensive brickworks in the suburbs of Rome. But as he came from Nemausus in Gallia Narbonensis, and was probably the first member of his family to reach senatorial rank, he was hardly a typical aristocrat.

page 41 note 1 Gomme, A. W., The Population of Athens in the 5th and 4th centuries B.c. (Oxford, 1933). 1–35 (esp. 27–8).Google Scholar

page 41 note 2 Augustus, , Res Gestae 8. 2Google Scholar. It is generally supposed that the figures for the republican era given by Livy represent adult males only, and as Augustus carefully used exactly the same formula as that found in the text of Livy (e.g. xlii. 10. 2–3) there is little justification for the view that his figures represent something different. (For the view that Augustus included women and children in his census as well as adult males see Beloch, , Bevölkerung der griech.-röm. Welt (Leipzig, 1886), 370 f.Google Scholar, and Klio, 3, pp. 471 f.)Google Scholar For the factor of 3½ by which I have multiplied the Augustan figures to obtain the total population see Duncan-Jones, R. P. in JRS 53 (1963), 87Google Scholar. Gomme, (op. cit. 75 f.)Google Scholar used a factor of 4, but his figures for Athenian males excluded those who were too old for military service, whereas such men were almost certainly included in the Roman census figures.

page 41 note 3 Augustus, , Res Gestae 8. 4Google Scholar; Tacitus, , Ann. xi. 25Google Scholar. The Augustan and Claudian figures may include Roman citizens resident outside Italy, but if they do, there is no means of telling what deduction should be made for such people.

page 43 note 1 Dessau, , ILS, no. 8709Google Scholar. For the working of British metal ores by the Romans see Richmond, I. A., Roman Britain (Harmondsworth, 1955), 149–60.Google Scholar

page 44 note 1 For example, at Housesteads on Hadrian's Wall one of the guard-rooms of the E. gate of the fort was converted into a coal-store some time after A.d. 297, and nearly a cart-load was still lying there when the excavators uncovered it (Bruce, J. Collingwood, Handbook to the Roman Wall [11th ed., ed. by Richmond, I. A., Newcastle-on-Tyne, 1957], 124).Google Scholar

page 44 note 2 The exceptional finds have been made in the Cambridge area, but it is probable that this coal was transported to East Anglia from Nottinghamshire or Yorkshire by water transport via the Car Dyke, the Foss Dyke, the Trent, and the Ouse; cf. Sir Fox, Cyril, The Archaeology of the Cambridge Region (Cambridge, 1923), 179–81.Google Scholar

page 45 note 1 Singer, , Holmyard, , Hall, , and Williams, (eds.), A History of Technology (Oxford, 1956), ii. 41 f. (esp. 68).Google Scholar

page 46 note 1 Singer, , etc., op. cit. ii. 593–606.Google Scholar

page 47 note 1 I am indebted to several of my former colleagues in other disciplines at Aberdeen for advice on matters normally outside the competence of a classical scholar, and in particular to Mr. Malcolm Gray, Senior Lecturer in Economic History, who directed my attention to the works by modern economists cited in the notes and subsequently read and commented on an early draft of this paper. I must also record my indebtedness to the volumes edited by the late Frank, Tenney, An Economic Survey of Ancient Rome (Baltimore, 1933–1940)Google Scholar, which were the source of much valuable information.