Why was there so little scientific and technological advancement in the Roman Empire?
pic unrelated
>>1124235
Why bother when they get slaves to do all their work
Say what you want about how great the roman empire was, but at least the greeks gave a shit about science
>>1124241
This is a pretty good point, a few things I need clarification on though: the European imperial powers all had huge amounts of surplus labour, and yet scientists still innovated. What incentivised them? Also, could the same problem be said about China
Modern science really wasn't a thing until the 17th century, OP.
>>1124246
>and yet scientists still innovated. What incentivised them?
Freedom n shiet?
>muh circles
>>1124246
I read somewhere that modern science started with western Europe because they were the first ones to discover a new continent and realise there were things they didn't know yet. So they became curious and invented science. Before that, the whole world didn't care about new information because it was either wrong or trivial to them.
>>1124235
>Why was there so little scientific and technological advancement in the Roman Empire?
Science in antiquity was essentially equal to making philosophical disputes and constructing novelty-toys. It had very little impact onto the lives of ordinary proles, it was confined to the palaces of aristocracy. The very few existing research institution (like Alexandrian Museum) were attached to and paid by the state and mostly concerned with making useful things for war.
Rome erased other states, which made it hard for scientists to find a court with a willing patron of science sitting on the throne. The asymmetric warfare that Rome waged upon the majority of barbarians further erased the need for war-related science. There was little competition on the international state since for quite a long time all Rome's neighbors were weaker than her. Add to the mix the general conservatism of the Roman society (ways of ancestors are the best ways), cheap slave labor and you have in general a society that his hostile to any progress.
>>1124235
>advancements in city planning, architecture, farming, military strategy, logistics, equipment, etc all don't count
What did you want from them, some useless meme engine?
>>1124264
Thanks mate
>>1124246
Competition
Roman Empire didn't give a shit about technological competition, because all immediate neighbours were, in their eyes, completely retarded, and whatever ressources they had Rome could just obtain by conquering the place. Greeks were more keen on blue sky thinking with little practical applications (unless it was for architecture)
Europe was made of rival imperial/monarchic powers who could each get a lot richer and powerful than the rival countries just by funding scientific research. Galileo got to perfect the telescope because Venice needed it to get the upper hand against other city states.
Communication and lack of war between populations is also an extremely important factor in scientific research, because you can share your discoveries and let others improve them without trouble. 19th century european painting is way more realistic than indian or japanese because it's the result of 400 years of painters trying to look better than the other countries'.
>>1124276
>meme engine
>>1124313
>Holy
>Roman
>Empire
>>1124276
Roman were more about diffusion and refinement of existing inventions. All those things you mentioned existed before they conquered the world.
New inventions... nope.
>>1124319
>diffusion and refinement
Literally what do you think the word advancement means? You don't just skip from a scythe to a combine.
I guess the romans cuck'd the entire world, so they did not have much incentive to develop their technology further because there were no relevant enemies. When there's no enemy threatening the empire, you don't need the make your swords better or train your soldiers better for example. So when you have cucked literally everyone, you can just sit back and relax.
>>1124307
This basically. The same logic applies to northern Italy during the middle ages and renaissance, when it was divided in several communes(Comuni) and lordships (Signorie), which were small states often even composed of one single city-state. Since waging war one against the other meant having a third lordship potentially taking the advantage and attacking the one whose armies are away from home, artistic competition came to be. This was between several lordships, between one or more lordships and the Papal State and even between a lordship's noble families. This competition was to prove one's strenght, as the one who can spend a lot into art can also spend it into war efforts.
The result would be an age in which several painters, sculptors and architects would come from and be found in these italian lordships and, consequently, the massive artistic heritage that was preserved and still exists to this day. All these monumental churches, statues, painting, frescos and whatnot are the result of an alternative to war.
>>1124342
Rome THOUGHT that everyone else was a backwards tribe whom were not worthy of having the resources they may have had, but germanic iron for example was more advanced compared to roman one. Rome did not advance technologically because they had gotten haughty, arrogant and superb, even when the empire was in decadence they still believed themselves to be the strongest so when the goths came they never bothered to improve their technological advancement to face the coming abversities. Sometimes peace makes for a better scenario for technological advancements, but sometimes either war or just political tensions can inspire new inventions.
