<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Industrial-Revolution on Class Letters</title><link>https://classletters.org/tags/industrial-revolution/</link><description>Recent content in Industrial-Revolution on Class Letters</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>en-us</language><lastBuildDate>Thu, 08 Feb 2024 23:20:45 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://classletters.org/tags/industrial-revolution/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>Why no Roman Industrial Revolution?</title><link>https://classletters.org/posts/assorted/why_no_roman_ind_rev/</link><pubDate>Thu, 08 Feb 2024 23:20:45 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://classletters.org/posts/assorted/why_no_roman_ind_rev/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;Original at &lt;a href="https://acoup.blog/2022/08/26/collections-why-no-roman-industrial-revolution/"&gt;https://acoup.blog/2022/08/26/collections-why-no-roman-industrial-revolution/&lt;/a&gt; . Linked to it via Paul Cockshott.&lt;/p&gt;&#10;&lt;h2 id="the-question"&gt;The Question&lt;/h2&gt;&#10;&lt;p&gt;That said this is a question that is not absurd a priori. As we’ll see, the&#10;Roman Empire was never close to an industrial revolution – a great many of the&#10;preconditions were missing – but the idea that it might have been on the cusp&#10;of being something like a modern economy did once have its day in the&#10;scholarship. As I’ve mentioned before, the dominant feature of the historical&#10;debate among scholars about the shape of the Roman economy is between&#10;‘modernists’ who argue the Roman economy is relatively more like a modern&#10;economy (meaning both that it was relatively more prosperous than other ancient&#10;economies but also that the Romans themselves maintained a more modern,&#10;familiar outlook towards money, investment and production) and ‘primitivsts’&#10;who argue that actually the Roman economy was quite primitive, less prosperous&#10;and with the Romans themselves holding attitudes about the economy quite alien&#10;to our own. But here we need to get into a bit more specificity because beneath&#10;that quick description it is necessary to separate what we might call the ‘old&#10;modernists’ and the ‘new modernists.’&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>