PDA

View Full Version : Medieval Technology


Michael
Jul 19th 2010, 09:21 PM
Medieval technology is not an oxymoron!

According to stereotype, the medieval era was a time of oppressive theocracy, when nothing 'new' was created and everything was always done 'exactly as it was always done before'. The medieval era is practically the stereotype definition for nasty and brutal manual labor, obfusicating theologies and a famous reputation for ignorance and superstition.

One only has to compare Europe (circa 1000 AD) with its contemporaries - either the Islamic society or the Chinese society - to see that Europe was, by every possible measure, backwards, poor and technologically limited.

The problem with this 'stereotype' is that it is categorically and massively, wrong.

By 1500 AD, the traditional 'end' of the medieval era, Europe (particularly western Europe) was militarily, scientifically and technologically more advanced in comparison with every place on the planet - by a significant margin (a position that western Europe retained into the present era).

Apparently, the medieval era witnessed one of the greatest 'leaps forward' in technology the world has ever witnessed. Some newer medieval scholars like to refer to the '1st industrial revolution' of the 12th century. This is a bit of an exageration, but it is reasonable to assert that the technological and industrial innovations developed by medievel society were as great and as far-reaching in effects of the more famous industrial revolution of the 18th century.

Here is just a short list of key medieval inventions or innovations: (please note that not every invention listed is entirely unique to Western Europe - some of them originated in China or India (in different forms), but were adapted or perfected in Europe - some others appear to duplicate Chinese inventions but lack any evidence of transmission).

Agriculture:

First and most importantly are the developments in agriculture. The padded-horse-collar and the nailed iron horseshoe (both of Chinese origin) were adopted/adapted in the early medieval era and this allowed the horse to be harnessed for labor to replace the much slower and less efficient ox for pulling plows, carts and wagons. A new plow design (with wheels and coulter) allowed deeper plowing suitable for the rich soils of the cleared fields and forests of north-western Europe. The deep 'ridge & furrow' pattern produced had additional benefits when draughts occured.

In addition to these material inventions, there were the innovations of the open-fields system, three-field crop rotation and spring vegetable plantings (to restore nitrogen in the soil) all combined to produce crop yields in north-western Europe that were several times higher than anything ever produced in the Roman Empire in their most fertile of provinces.

Water-power

The second really big and important development is in the water wheel. Again, this was not a new invention. Water wheels of various sorts had been known in Greece, Arabia, China and India - mostly used for milling grain but also as an aid for irrigation (the water-screw). Oddly enough, the Romans didn't really use the water-wheel - relying upon animals or slaves for almost all labor tasks.

What the medieval Europeans invented was the upright 'over-shot' water-wheel where the water flow is directed to flow over the water-wheel, rather than under it as was the normal case (when you put a regular water-wheel into a river, the water flows 'under' the water-wheel). This 'over-shot' technique produced a massive increase in the 'horsepower' of output when compared with any other type of existing water-wheels (5 or 6 times as much power) and was entirely unique to Europe.

These new 'high power' water-wheels enabled the driving of multiple grain mills from a single water-wheel, or the increased power was used to drive an industrial process (such as sawing lumber, drawing wire or the fulling of wool - all of which represent very physically taxing labors).

Clothmaking:

Here is another area where the medieval Europeans really benefited from the innovations of everyone else. Almost all the principles and processes of clothmaking (mostly cotton or wool) were invented in China or India long ago and well known to the Arabs, Greeks and Romans. Btw, silk making was originally a Chinese state-secret - which was subsequently stolen by just about everyone.

What was unique about the medieval European contribution to the process was in taking all the developments of ancient China, India and Arabia - and combining them into a massively improved version of the traditional process. The basic design of the new loom was originally inspired by Chinese silk looms. The Europeans turned the old loom horizontal (so it could be larger) and foot pedals were added to drive it back and forth to free the weaver's hands to handle the shuttlecock (speeding up the process enormously!). And thus the European textile industry was born in the 12th century.

Architecture:

The medieval construction of the great gothic cathedrals of Western Europe speaks for itself. These are buildings of unparalled beauty, built with remarkable craftsmanship and manual processes (wooden scaffolds). They also represent the development of several new unique building techniques including the pointed arch and the flying buttress, which are all about distributing weight with geometric principles. Btw, the beautiful stained glass windows were added as an afterthought to fill the open spaces - they weren't part of the original designs.

The Romans and Greeks, for all their brilliant constructions and engineering skills, couldn't build anything like a medieval cathedral with that high vaulted ceiling and all those big windows - it was deemed physically impossible.

Shipbuilding:

The development of the medieval Cog gets its shape (roundship) from the Baltic and its sails from the Mediterranean (lanteen). The Europeans also figured out that ship-building is a whole lot easier (and the ships are a whole lot stronger) if you lay down the keel and ribs first and then add the hull planks afterwards, rather than laborously and skillfully building up the hull first and then adding ribs to strengthen it. The upshot of this was that shipbuilding became a whole lot easier and faster (and thus cheaper). With cheaper ships, there were a whole lot more of them out there.

Eventually, they added a second and third mast to this same design, and made the ships slightly longer by proportion (and more sails). Add the stern-rudder and the magnetic compass which came from China in the 12th century, and you have the ships that Columbus sailed across the Atlantic in 1492.

Weapons & Warfare:

Beginning with stirrups and bridles in the 7th century, chain mail & bailley castles in the 10th century, seige engines (trebuchets and mangonels) and crossbows in the 12th/13th century, and finally gunpowder and cannon in the 14th century, Europe witnessed several major military revolutions in technology of the battlefield.

Printing Press:

Gutenburg invented his moveable type printing press in 1440 (15th century). This device is similar in form to a machine invented by the Chinese in the 9th century, which was never commercially developed at all. It is generally believed that the 'western' printing press was independently developed as it followed a progression over a period of development with each new type improved upon an earlier design. Gutenburg didn't really invent the printing process (it is an invention that requires several different inventions, like papermaking and ink) - he just put it all together and perfected it for a commercial application, though he did come up with the 'moveable type' principle which was the core idea that makes the whole thing so successful.

* * *

I could add more, but I'll leave it at that, since there should be more than enough here to show that medieval Europe was a veritable hotbed of technological innovation and improvement over Roman period technology that preceeds it.

The bottom line is that Western Europe began its rise to 'planetary' power/domination in the 15th century, built on technologies developed in the 7th to 15th century period - exactly the same period that is denoted as the beginning and the end of the "medieval era" in the history books.

* * *

For anyone who is curious, I wrote this with a little help from Google and a book called Cathedral, Forge and Waterwheel, Technology and Invention in the Middle Ages, by Frances & Joseph Gies, (HarperCollins; 1994) that I have on my bookshelf.

Non Sequitur
Jul 21st 2010, 12:27 AM
great post Michael. I have a great deal of sympathy for the medieval era. Especially the Church in this era which gets so maligned by Protestants sometimes.

Michael
Jul 22nd 2010, 08:26 PM
great post Michael. I have a great deal of sympathy for the medieval era. Especially the Church in this era which gets so maligned by Protestants sometimes.

Being a student of medieval history, the Church makes a BIG TARGET for critique. I don't see how one can say that critique isn't justified.

Popes with their mistresses and children living in the Vatican, child bishops, simony, indulgences, scholasticism and the decadence of the Church and monasteries... what's there to defend the [late] medieval Church? I'll grant that some of the orders of Friars were actually quite impressive at that time - but that just shows up how bad the rest of the Church was. Luther's target was an easy one to skewer and one of the main reasons that Luther was so successful. If the 16th century Church wasn't so corrupt, Luther would have been burnt at the stake.

(yes, I am trolling you here!) :D

Non Sequitur
Jul 22nd 2010, 10:55 PM
Being a student of medieval history, the Church makes a BIG TARGET for critique. I don't see how one can say that critique isn't justified.

Popes with their mistresses and children living in the Vatican, child bishops, simony, indulgences, scholasticism and the decadence of the Church and monasteries... what's there to defend the [late] medieval Church? I'll grant that some of the orders of Friars were actually quite impressive at that time - but that just shows up how bad the rest of the Church was. Luther's target was an easy one to skewer and one of the main reasons that Luther was so successful. If the 16th century Church wasn't so corrupt, Luther would have been burnt at the stake.

(yes, I am trolling you here!) :D

:lol: ok here we go

I will begin by saying that I am by no means justifying the offenses commited by the Medieval Church. They are clearly against Scripture and just common decency. I wouldn't be a protestant if I thought differently.

When I say I have sympathy i mean that I understand how the church got in the position it did. You said on another thread that the State was not really functioning during this period. The only organized body that really was working was the church after the fall of the Roman empire. People turned to the church as the institution that was still functioning. I am not sure it was an "un-Christian" decision to make the church the vehicle through which Europe was organized after the fall of Rome. The anology I usually say use imagine that the American government fell today, what would be the only institution with schools and resources to organize itself. Answer: the Catholic Church. It's not hard to see why people would turn to them for help.

However, by the time of Luther what was an understandable decision had become a monster.

To play devil's advocate Thomas Aquinas was a product of the medieval Church.

Michael
Jul 23rd 2010, 11:24 AM
:lol: ok here we go

I will begin by saying that I am by no means justifying the offenses commited by the Medieval Church. They are clearly against Scripture and just common decency. I wouldn't be a protestant if I thought differently.

When I say I have sympathy i mean that I understand how the church got in the position it did. You said on another thread that the State was not really functioning during this period. The only organized body that really was working was the church after the fall of the Roman empire. People turned to the church as the institution that was still functioning. I am not sure it was an "un-Christian" decision to make the church the vehicle through which Europe was organized after the fall of Rome. The anology I usually say use imagine that the American government fell today, what would be the only institution with schools and resources to organize itself. Answer: the Catholic Church. It's not hard to see why people would turn to them for help.

However, by the time of Luther what was an understandable decision had become a monster.

To play devil's advocate Thomas Aquinas was a product of the medieval Church.
I figured you might take the pro-protestant argument that there would be no 'protest' if the medieval Church wasn't as corrupt as it was. Ergo, from a protestant perspective, the medieval Church being corrupt was a good thing that made protestantism possible! ;)

Non Sequitur
Jul 23rd 2010, 01:53 PM
I figured you might take the pro-protestant argument that there would be no 'protest' if the medieval Church wasn't as corrupt as it was. Ergo, from a protestant perspective, the medieval Church being corrupt was a good thing that made protestantism possible! ;)

This might be a little off topic as it is a theology statement, but if one truly believes what the creed says, one cannot just radically divide the Christian Church when Martin Luther pops up. Both the Niceane and the Apostles creed say "we believe in the catholic church" confessing the church as catholic (small c) means to confess that the church is united in all times and places. Therefore, I consider it borderline heresy to say "we are the true church and the medieval church was not the church." Like it or not, Christians have to come to bear that it's all the Church. Both good and bad.

Margot
Jul 23rd 2010, 10:35 PM
And at the same time, this is the culture that used Ptolemy's pint-sized world map and structure of the universe, and which allowed for the Inquisition's positive feedback loop.

The medieval period does have a lot of unsung heros when it comes to technology--but what's so shocking is that so much of it had to be rediscovered. When I think of the medieval period as a stand alone period, I find that I can appreciate what was accomplished in "the dark ages," but when I think about the medieval period in the context of everything that came before, and everything that came after, it seems like it really was sort of a flop age.

For example: YAY PRINTING PRESS! Now we cam make lots of copies of Ptolemy's half-sized map (special because it re-discovered longitude and latitude), instead of lots of copies of, say anything done by the ancient greek Eratosthenes.

I think of the entire medieval period as a system of "one step forward, two steps back, and why the hell am I dancing anyway? (Oh, yeah, because the church told me to.)" These inventions and discoveries weren't inventions of "why?" but rather of "how?" I applaud the accomplishments made in the vein of "necessity is the mother of invention," but they also creep me out, you know?

Michael
Jul 24th 2010, 09:08 AM
And at the same time, this is the culture that used Ptolemy's pint-sized world map and structure of the universe, and which allowed for the Inquisition's positive feedback loop.
The Portuguese managed to sail around Africa to the Far Eat and Columbus managed to find America - all using maps based on Ptolemy. :shrug:

I'm aware of the flaws in Ptolemy's geography, but it was a remarkably functional system for being wrong.

The medieval period does have a lot of unsung heros when it comes to technology--but what's so shocking is that so much of it had to be rediscovered. When I think of the medieval period as a stand alone period, I find that I can appreciate what was accomplished in "the dark ages," but when I think about the medieval period in the context of everything that came before, and everything that came after, it seems like it really was sort of a flop age.
That so much needed to be rediscovered had a lot to do with the Germanic/barbarian invasions that swamped Europe and destroyed the (Western) Roman Empire in the 5th-6th-7th centuries. Much was lost at that time (hence the name "Dark Ages" for that particular period).

And as I pointed out in the OP, by the end of the medieval period, Western Europe was on top of the world when it came to technology. How can you say that it was "really sort of a flop age" in the context of technology? That makes no sense.

The whole thesis of the OP is that the medieval era witnessed the greatest period of technological innovation in human history prior to the industrial revolution.

For example: YAY PRINTING PRESS! Now we cam make lots of copies of Ptolemy's half-sized map (special because it re-discovered longitude and latitude), instead of lots of copies of, say anything done by the ancient greek Eratosthenes.
As noted above, Ptolemy's map system was remarkably functional, despite being wrong. And it was quite a long time after the 15th century invention of the printing press before it was ever used to print a map (which is uniquely challenging for the old printing presses). Given that I happen to have an interest in antique maps, I can honestly say the first actually printed maps probably didn't appear until at least the 18th century. Until that time, they were always drawn by hand.

No, Gutenberg's press was used to print Bibles which had a huge socio-political-cultural effect upon society. Later on, the printing press was used to print technical manuals. Bibles and technical manuals make up the vast majority of printed books in the 15th-17th century period.

I think of the entire medieval period as a system of "one step forward, two steps back, and why the hell am I dancing anyway? (Oh, yeah, because the church told me to.)" These inventions and discoveries weren't inventions of "why?" but rather of "how?" I applaud the accomplishments made in the vein of "necessity is the mother of invention," but they also creep me out, you know?
The question of "why" is pure science. The question of "how" is applied technology.

And when it comes to "why" the medievalists had some solid contributions - particularly in optics.

But it is to be noted that almost every society prior to the advanced west, neglected 'pure science'. Only the Greeks stand out for that.

Elay
Apr 16th 2011, 02:03 PM
very gd analysis dear friend.

now to all members, im a M2 masters in architecture student and i need help with my final project.
what i severly need, if anyone can help , some examples of some modern military barracks, modern military air bases , modern navy bases , underground bases,
i am in dire need of perspectives, plans , ... u know ! everything u share is extremly apprecciated because , as u know , miltary architecture books, examples, infos ... are very rare.
and thanks in advance for your help in any way u find suitable !
and of course, im looking for a late 20 century architecure and 21st century cos my theme is military architecture...
thanks again...

cheers,
Elay

NickKIELCEPoland
Apr 16th 2011, 02:52 PM
Medieval techonology...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQHX-SjgQvQ

Michael
Apr 17th 2011, 10:18 AM
Medieval techonology...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQHX-SjgQvQ

I'm surprised that Monty Python never did a skit like that! :lol:

NickKIELCEPoland
Apr 17th 2011, 01:20 PM
I'm surprised that Monty Python never did a skit like that! :lol:
I suppose we audiences can only hope that the pool of sketches that have never been thought of before will never run dry.