Message from @Shaun
Discord ID: 689631948087230562
They could have
But didn't
Possibly
the demand created by a steam engine would have driven better metalurgy
Not really
Steam locomotives+road
farming advances would be necessary?
It requires a significant investment from the medium to large stakeholders to do industrialisation, you could still have artisanal high quality metallurgy, they did in the high medeival ages
@Asdrubal =choo choo train
Sure, but the initial investment would never be fielded
Needs to be profitable every step of the way or for someone with enough power to force it through to a seen profitable end
@Joe The Communist yes, train go choo choo
whee
Rome didn't have a seen profitable end and slavery prevented it being profitable short term
but a steam engine would have made up some of the work
Idk it would change that much.
"Why didnt they put slaves in the factories?" They did lmao
Industrial revolution was a lot more things than steam machines.
and it could spur more interest in making shit
Theoretically yes
Or you could get 10 more slaves
And guarantee a profit
steam engines dont revolt
And once you have the steam engine you've developed its limited in use
Slaves rarely revolted either
10 slaves
A large enough slave revolt would do it
or 3 slaves+steam engine
Not really, you lose out on 10 slaves and get a single use steam engine
It'd take much much much variation to produce the industrial possibilities we know of
Probably bigger cities assuming they wont develop steam traina
Trains
Needs way more investment
They'd develop trains
That could save the empire
Same with long distance rapid communication
If they develop trains then the empire would be bigger and more unified
And centralised industrial weapon production
if rome began to industrialize the working class would begin to hold factory jobs while the slaves worked the countryside
Yes