https://classletters.org/authors/bret-devereaux/Recent content in Bret Devereaux on Class LettersHugoen-usThu, 08 Feb 2024 23:20:45 +0000https://classletters.org/posts/assorted/why_no_roman_ind_rev/Thu, 08 Feb 2024 23:20:45 +0000https://classletters.org/posts/assorted/why_no_roman_ind_rev/<p>Original at <a href="https://acoup.blog/2022/08/26/collections-why-no-roman-industrial-revolution/">https://acoup.blog/2022/08/26/collections-why-no-roman-industrial-revolution/</a> . Linked to it via Paul Cockshott.</p> <h2 id="the-question">The Question</h2> <p>That said this is a question that is not absurd a priori. As we’ll see, the Roman Empire was never close to an industrial revolution – a great many of the preconditions were missing – but the idea that it might have been on the cusp of being something like a modern economy did once have its day in the scholarship. As I’ve mentioned before, the dominant feature of the historical debate among scholars about the shape of the Roman economy is between ‘modernists’ who argue the Roman economy is relatively more like a modern economy (meaning both that it was relatively more prosperous than other ancient economies but also that the Romans themselves maintained a more modern, familiar outlook towards money, investment and production) and ‘primitivsts’ who argue that actually the Roman economy was quite primitive, less prosperous and with the Romans themselves holding attitudes about the economy quite alien to our own. But here we need to get into a bit more specificity because beneath that quick description it is necessary to separate what we might call the ‘old modernists’ and the ‘new modernists.’</p>