[HN Gopher] Hierapolis Sawmill
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Hierapolis Sawmill
        
       Author : benbreen
       Score  : 64 points
       Date   : 2023-06-05 18:34 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (en.wikipedia.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (en.wikipedia.org)
        
       | Symbiote wrote:
       | The carving is photographed here:
       | https://static.cambridge.org/content/id/urn%3Acambridge.org%...
       | 
       | Via https://doi.org/10.1017/S1047759400005341
        
       | 0x_rs wrote:
       | I think one of the largest examples of water-based mechanical
       | engineering from around that time is at Barbegal [0], _the
       | greatest known concentration of mechanical power in the ancient
       | world_ and _The capacity of the mills has been estimated at 4.5
       | tons of flour per day, enough to supply bread for as many as
       | 10,000 of perhaps 30-40,000 inhabitants of Arelate at that time_.
       | Spain mines also had very interesting (albeit slave-powered)
       | solutions, with up to 16 wheels draining a mine over 30 vertical
       | meters[1] (and possibly more in other sites), one of which was
       | discovered  "intact"! [2, 3] Pre-industrial era engineering in
       | general can be very fascinating.
       | 
       | 0. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbegal_aqueduct_and_mills
       | 
       | 1.
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_overshot_water_wheel#E...
       | 
       | 2.
       | https://www.naturalhistorymag.com/sites/default/files/media/...
       | 
       | 3.
       | https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/object/G_1889-0622-...
        
       | Jun8 wrote:
       | Relevant HN discussion on why Romans didn't achieve Industrial
       | Revolution: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32607187
       | Spoiler: it wasn't because slaves were cheap.
        
       | wil421 wrote:
       | They didn't have the metallurgy to make a reliable steam engine.
       | However I think they could've industrialized a lot of things
       | using a bronze turbine or waterwheel and a ton of belt systems
       | like old factories once did with line shafts.[1]
       | 
       | [1]https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Line_shaft
        
         | qwytw wrote:
         | > didn't have the metallurgy
         | 
         | I wonder if in theory they could've made in bronze. It was
         | still generally the superior metal compared to iron/steel in
         | most ways till the middle ages (IIRC) and much easier to work.
         | It's only downside was cost.
        
           | tlb wrote:
           | If you make both piston and cylinder out of bronze, they
           | stick together and wear quickly. It's better to make one from
           | bronze and one from iron.
        
         | tomohawk wrote:
         | And not much motive to develop it. Slaves were abundant and the
         | practice was widely accepted in paganism. This skewed the
         | economics to favor making use of them.
        
           | bluGill wrote:
           | Slaves were cheaper than the early steam engines. As such
           | even if you built a steam engine (I think historians have
           | documented primitive ones that did work - but they were
           | small, very low power, and inefficient) it wasn't clear that
           | the effort to develop it into something better is worth the
           | cost.
        
             | 0cf8612b2e1e wrote:
             | The acoup blog went into detail on this topic [0]. Central
             | idea was that early steam power was so inefficient the only
             | way it was worthwhile was for use in coal mines where the
             | fuel was basically free. It took years of improvements to
             | make the technology cost effective in other domains.
             | 
             | [0] https://acoup.blog/2022/08/26/collections-why-no-roman-
             | indus...
        
             | Alupis wrote:
             | Machines can work 24/7, don't get sick, don't get lazy,
             | don't need training, don't need to be fed, etc.
             | 
             | Even in a world where slave labor was cheaper, machines
             | were obviously better. Fewer people could produce the same
             | output no matter how you look at it.
        
               | bluGill wrote:
               | Machines break all the time. Particularly when you are
               | faced with the metals available back then. They are a lot
               | more reliable today, but we have had ~200 years of
               | industrial revolution to learn how to make reliable
               | machines. We also have a lot more population, and that
               | means a lot more people thinking about how to make
               | machines more reliable.
               | 
               | Modern machines are clearly better than slave labor
               | today. However 2000 years ago a lot of things were
               | different.
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | charliea0 wrote:
               | The machines need lots of fuel which either needs to be
               | chopped from forests or dug out of coal mines. Both those
               | tasks were labor-intensive and costly.
               | 
               | Some water mills were cost effective though.
        
           | Dalewyn wrote:
           | >Slaves were abundant and the practice was widely accepted in
           | paganism.
           | 
           | Slavery in various forms was widely utilized across all of
           | humanity until the last few centuries, and in some ways it
           | still is utilized today. We just don't _call_ it slavery
           | anymore.
           | 
           | "Paganism" has nothing to do with it.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-06-06 23:01 UTC)