Industrial milling in the ancient and medieval worlds : A survey of the evidence for an industrial revolution in medieval Europe

Technology and Culture

Volumn 46, Issue 1, 2005, Pages 1-30

  Lucas, Adam Robert ^a  

^a Cabinet Off Govt of New S Wales   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 17444364874     PISSN: 0040165X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1353/tech.2005.0026     Document Type: Article

References (171)

1. Lewis Mumford, Technics and Civilization (New York, 1934; reprint, Orlando, 1963), 112, 113-18; Marc Bloch, "Avènement et conquêtes du moulin à eau," Annales d'histoire économique et sociale 7 (1935): 538-63, published in English as "The Advent and Triumph of the Watermill," in Land and Work in Mediaeval Europe: Selected Papers by Marc Bloch (London, 1967), 136-68.
2. Lewis Mumford, Technics and Civilization (New York, 1934; reprint, Orlando, 1963), 112, 113-18; Marc Bloch, "Avènement et conquêtes du moulin à eau," Annales d'histoire économique et sociale 7 (1935): 538-63, published in English as "The Advent and Triumph of the Watermill," in Land and Work in Mediaeval Europe: Selected Papers by Marc Bloch (London, 1967), 136-68.
3. Lewis Mumford, Technics and Civilization (New York, 1934; reprint, Orlando, 1963), 112, 113-18; Marc Bloch, "Avènement et conquêtes du moulin à eau," Annales d'histoire économique et sociale 7 (1935): 538-63, published in English as "The Advent and Triumph of the Watermill," in Land and Work in Mediaeval Europe: Selected Papers by Marc Bloch (London, 1967), 136-68.
4. Mumford appears to have been the first scholar to allude to the idea that there had been an industrial revolution in the Middle Ages. Anticipating Bloch, he argues in the third chapter of Technics and Civilization, titled "New Sources of Power," that if power machinery is regarded as one of the primary manifestations of the new capitalist economy, "the modern industrial revolution began in the twelfth century and was in full swing by the fifteenth."
5. Eleanora Carus-Wilson, "An Industrial Revolution of the Thirteenth Century," Economic History Review 11 (1941): 39-60. Carus-Wilson drewa clear analogy between the social disruption caused by the widespread mechanization of the English fulling industry in the thirteenth century and the mechanization of the English textile industry in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries and its consequences: "[T]he [thirteenth] century was one of striking progress industrially, though of equally striking change and upheaval.... It witnessed, in fact, an industrial revolution due to scientific discoveries and changes in technique: a revolution which brought poverty, unemployment, and discontent to certain old centres of industry, but wealth, opportunity and prosperity to the country as a whole, and which was destined to alter the face of medieval England." In a later essay on the medieval woolen industry, she wrote that the mechanization of fulling "was as decisive an event as the mechanization of spinning and weaving in the eighteenth century"; "The Woollen Industry," in Trade and Industry in the Middle Ages, ed. M. Postan and E. E. Rich, vol. 2 of The Cambridge Economic History of Europe (Cambridge, 1952), 409. As any student of the Industrial Revolution knows, the social and economic trans-formations wrought by the mechanization of the textile industry in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries are considered paradigmatic of that revolution.
6. Eleanora Carus-Wilson, "An Industrial Revolution of the Thirteenth Century," Economic History Review 11 (1941): 39-60. Carus-Wilson drewa clear analogy between the social disruption caused by the widespread mechanization of the English fulling industry in the thirteenth century and the mechanization of the English textile industry in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries and its consequences: "[T]he [thirteenth] century was one of striking progress industrially, though of equally striking change and upheaval.... It witnessed, in fact, an industrial revolution due to scientific discoveries and changes in technique: a revolution which brought poverty, unemployment, and discontent to certain old centres of industry, but wealth, opportunity and prosperity to the country as a whole, and which was destined to alter the face of medieval England." In a later essay on the medieval woolen industry, she wrote that the mechanization of fulling "was as decisive an event as the mechanization of spinning and weaving in the eighteenth century"; "The Woollen Industry," in Trade and Industry in the Middle Ages, ed. M. Postan and E. E. Rich, vol. 2 of The Cambridge Economic History of Europe (Cambridge, 1952), 409. As any student of the Industrial Revolution knows, the social and economic trans-formations wrought by the mechanization of the textile industry in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries are considered paradigmatic of that revolution.
7. Some of the relevant historiographical issues are canvassed by various authors in Michael Adas, Machines as the Measure of Men: Science, Technology, and Ideologies of Western Dominance (Ithaca, N.Y., 1993); E. Smith and M. Wolfe, eds., Technology and Resource Use in Medieval Europe: Cathedrals, Mills, and Mines (Aldershot, Hants., 1997); Örjan Wikander, "Industrial Applications of Water-Power," in Handbook of Ancient Water Technology, ed. Örjan Wikander (Leiden, 2000), 401-12.
8. Some of the relevant historiographical issues are canvassed by various authors in Michael Adas, Machines as the Measure of Men: Science, Technology, and Ideologies of Western Dominance (Ithaca, N.Y., 1993); E. Smith and M. Wolfe, eds., Technology and Resource Use in Medieval Europe: Cathedrals, Mills, and Mines (Aldershot, Hants., 1997); Örjan Wikander, "Industrial Applications of Water-Power," in Handbook of Ancient Water Technology, ed. Örjan Wikander (Leiden, 2000), 401-12.
9. Some of the relevant historiographical issues are canvassed by various authors in Michael Adas, Machines as the Measure of Men: Science, Technology, and Ideologies of Western Dominance (Ithaca, N.Y., 1993); E. Smith and M. Wolfe, eds., Technology and Resource Use in Medieval Europe: Cathedrals, Mills, and Mines (Aldershot, Hants., 1997); Örjan Wikander, "Industrial Applications of Water-Power," in Handbook of Ancient Water Technology, ed. Örjan Wikander (Leiden, 2000), 401-12.
10. Bloch's views on the medieval break with the ancient world can be found in "The Advent and Triumph of the Watermill," 143-46. They are echoed in the history of technology literature by, for example, Robert J. Forbes, "Power," in A History of Technology, ed. Charles Singer et al., vol. 2, The Mediterranean Civilizations and the Middle Ages, c. 700 B.C. to c. A.D. 1500 (London, 1956), 601-6; Lynn White Jr., Medieval Religion and Technology: Collected Essays (Berkeley, 1978), 22; Jean Gimpel, The Medieval Machine: The Industrial Revolution of the Middle Ages, 2nd ed. (London, 1988), 7-10; Terry S. Reynolds, Stronger than a Hundred Men: A History of the Vertical Water Wheel (Baltimore, 1983), 32-35, 45; George Basalla, The Evolution of Technology (Cambridge, 1988), 146-47. Bloch's comments on the role of monasticism in the spread of water-mill technology can be found in "The Advent and Triumph of the Watermill," 148, 150-52, and are echoed by Robert Forbes, "Metallurgy and Technology in the Middle Ages," in Essays on the Social History of Science, ed. Samuel Lilley (Copenhagen, 1953), 50-51; Lewis Mumford, The Myth of the Machine: Technics and Human Development (London, 1967), 263-71; Lynn White Jr., Dynamo and Virgin Reconsidered: Essays in the Dynamism of Western Culture (Cambridge, Mass., 1968), 63-66; Basalla, 148; J. Kenneth Major, "Water, Wind and Animal Power," in An Encyclopaedia of the History of Technology, ed. Ian McNeil (London, 1990), 232. Bloch's views on the revolutionary growth in the use of waterpower and wind power can be found in "The Advent and Triumph of the Water-mill," 141-42, 182, and are echoed in the work of Bertrand Gille, "Le moulin à eau: Une révolution technique médiévale," Techniques et Civilization 3 (1954): 1-15, and "The Problems of Power and Mechanization," in A History of Technology and Invention: Progress Through the Ages, vol. 1, The Origins of Technological Civilization, ed. Maurice Daumas, trans. Eileen B. Hennessy (New York, 1969), 451, 458; Lynn White Jr., Medieval Technology and Social Change (Oxford, 1964), 88-89; Gimpel, 10-12.
11. Bloch's views on the medieval break with the ancient world can be found in "The Advent and Triumph of the Watermill," 143-46. They are echoed in the history of technology literature by, for example, Robert J. Forbes, "Power," in A History of Technology, ed. Charles Singer et al., vol. 2, The Mediterranean Civilizations and the Middle Ages, c. 700 B.C. to c. A.D. 1500 (London, 1956), 601-6; Lynn White Jr., Medieval Religion and Technology: Collected Essays (Berkeley, 1978), 22; Jean Gimpel, The Medieval Machine: The Industrial Revolution of the Middle Ages, 2nd ed. (London, 1988), 7-10; Terry S. Reynolds, Stronger than a Hundred Men: A History of the Vertical Water Wheel (Baltimore, 1983), 32-35, 45; George Basalla, The Evolution of Technology (Cambridge, 1988), 146-47. Bloch's comments on the role of monasticism in the spread of water-mill technology can be found in "The Advent and Triumph of the Watermill," 148, 150-52, and are echoed by Robert Forbes, "Metallurgy and Technology in the Middle Ages," in Essays on the Social History of Science, ed. Samuel Lilley (Copenhagen, 1953), 50-51; Lewis Mumford, The Myth of the Machine: Technics and Human Development (London, 1967), 263-71; Lynn White Jr., Dynamo and Virgin Reconsidered: Essays in the Dynamism of Western Culture (Cambridge, Mass., 1968), 63-66; Basalla, 148; J. Kenneth Major, "Water, Wind and Animal Power," in An Encyclopaedia of the History of Technology, ed. Ian McNeil (London, 1990), 232. Bloch's views on the revolutionary growth in the use of waterpower and wind power can be found in "The Advent and Triumph of the Water-mill," 141-42, 182, and are echoed in the work of Bertrand Gille, "Le moulin à eau: Une révolution technique médiévale," Techniques et Civilization 3 (1954): 1-15, and "The Problems of Power and Mechanization," in A History of Technology and Invention: Progress Through the Ages, vol. 1, The Origins of Technological Civilization, ed. Maurice Daumas, trans. Eileen B. Hennessy (New York, 1969), 451, 458; Lynn White Jr., Medieval Technology and Social Change (Oxford, 1964), 88-89; Gimpel, 10-12.
12. Bloch's views on the medieval break with the ancient world can be found in "The Advent and Triumph of the Watermill," 143-46. They are echoed in the history of technology literature by, for example, Robert J. Forbes, "Power," in A History of Technology, ed. Charles Singer et al., vol. 2, The Mediterranean Civilizations and the Middle Ages, c. 700 B.C. to c. A.D. 1500 (London, 1956), 601-6; Lynn White Jr., Medieval Religion and Technology: Collected Essays (Berkeley, 1978), 22; Jean Gimpel, The Medieval Machine: The Industrial Revolution of the Middle Ages, 2nd ed. (London, 1988), 7-10; Terry S. Reynolds, Stronger than a Hundred Men: A History of the Vertical Water Wheel (Baltimore, 1983), 32-35, 45; George Basalla, The Evolution of Technology (Cambridge, 1988), 146-47. Bloch's comments on the role of monasticism in the spread of water-mill technology can be found in "The Advent and Triumph of the Watermill," 148, 150-52, and are echoed by Robert Forbes, "Metallurgy and Technology in the Middle Ages," in Essays on the Social History of Science, ed. Samuel Lilley (Copenhagen, 1953), 50-51; Lewis Mumford, The Myth of the Machine: Technics and Human Development (London, 1967), 263-71; Lynn White Jr., Dynamo and Virgin Reconsidered: Essays in the Dynamism of Western Culture (Cambridge, Mass., 1968), 63-66; Basalla, 148; J. Kenneth Major, "Water, Wind and Animal Power," in An Encyclopaedia of the History of Technology, ed. Ian McNeil (London, 1990), 232. Bloch's views on the revolutionary growth in the use of waterpower and wind power can be found in "The Advent and Triumph of the Water-mill," 141-42, 182, and are echoed in the work of Bertrand Gille, "Le moulin à eau: Une révolution technique médiévale," Techniques et Civilization 3 (1954): 1-15, and "The Problems of Power and Mechanization," in A History of Technology and Invention: Progress Through the Ages, vol. 1, The Origins of Technological Civilization, ed. Maurice Daumas, trans. Eileen B. Hennessy (New York, 1969), 451, 458; Lynn White Jr., Medieval Technology and Social Change (Oxford, 1964), 88-89; Gimpel, 10-12.
13. Bloch's views on the medieval break with the ancient world can be found in "The Advent and Triumph of the Watermill," 143-46. They are echoed in the history of technology literature by, for example, Robert J. Forbes, "Power," in A History of Technology, ed. Charles Singer et al., vol. 2, The Mediterranean Civilizations and the Middle Ages, c. 700 B.C. to c. A.D. 1500 (London, 1956), 601-6; Lynn White Jr., Medieval Religion and Technology: Collected Essays (Berkeley, 1978), 22; Jean Gimpel, The Medieval Machine: The Industrial Revolution of the Middle Ages, 2nd ed. (London, 1988), 7-10; Terry S. Reynolds, Stronger than a Hundred Men: A History of the Vertical Water Wheel (Baltimore, 1983), 32-35, 45; George Basalla, The Evolution of Technology (Cambridge, 1988), 146-47. Bloch's comments on the role of monasticism in the spread of water-mill technology can be found in "The Advent and Triumph of the Watermill," 148, 150-52, and are echoed by Robert Forbes, "Metallurgy and Technology in the Middle Ages," in Essays on the Social History of Science, ed. Samuel Lilley (Copenhagen, 1953), 50-51; Lewis Mumford, The Myth of the Machine: Technics and Human Development (London, 1967), 263-71; Lynn White Jr., Dynamo and Virgin Reconsidered: Essays in the Dynamism of Western Culture (Cambridge, Mass., 1968), 63-66; Basalla, 148; J. Kenneth Major, "Water, Wind and Animal Power," in An Encyclopaedia of the History of Technology, ed. Ian McNeil (London, 1990), 232. Bloch's views on the revolutionary growth in the use of waterpower and wind power can be found in "The Advent and Triumph of the Water-mill," 141-42, 182, and are echoed in the work of Bertrand Gille, "Le moulin à eau: Une révolution technique médiévale," Techniques et Civilization 3 (1954): 1-15, and "The Problems of Power and Mechanization," in A History of Technology and Invention: Progress Through the Ages, vol. 1, The Origins of Technological Civilization, ed. Maurice Daumas, trans. Eileen B. Hennessy (New York, 1969), 451, 458; Lynn White Jr., Medieval Technology and Social Change (Oxford, 1964), 88-89; Gimpel, 10-12.
14. Bloch's views on the medieval break with the ancient world can be found in "The Advent and Triumph of the Watermill," 143-46. They are echoed in the history of technology literature by, for example, Robert J. Forbes, "Power," in A History of Technology, ed. Charles Singer et al., vol. 2, The Mediterranean Civilizations and the Middle Ages, c. 700 B.C. to c. A.D. 1500 (London, 1956), 601-6; Lynn White Jr., Medieval Religion and Technology: Collected Essays (Berkeley, 1978), 22; Jean Gimpel, The Medieval Machine: The Industrial Revolution of the Middle Ages, 2nd ed. (London, 1988), 7-10; Terry S. Reynolds, Stronger than a Hundred Men: A History of the Vertical Water Wheel (Baltimore, 1983), 32-35, 45; George Basalla, The Evolution of Technology (Cambridge, 1988), 146-47. Bloch's comments on the role of monasticism in the spread of water-mill technology can be found in "The Advent and Triumph of the Watermill," 148, 150-52, and are echoed by Robert Forbes, "Metallurgy and Technology in the Middle Ages," in Essays on the Social History of Science, ed. Samuel Lilley (Copenhagen, 1953), 50-51; Lewis Mumford, The Myth of the Machine: Technics and Human Development (London, 1967), 263-71; Lynn White Jr., Dynamo and Virgin Reconsidered: Essays in the Dynamism of Western Culture (Cambridge, Mass., 1968), 63-66; Basalla, 148; J. Kenneth Major, "Water, Wind and Animal Power," in An Encyclopaedia of the History of Technology, ed. Ian McNeil (London, 1990), 232. Bloch's views on the revolutionary growth in the use of waterpower and wind power can be found in "The Advent and Triumph of the Water-mill," 141-42, 182, and are echoed in the work of Bertrand Gille, "Le moulin à eau: Une révolution technique médiévale," Techniques et Civilization 3 (1954): 1-15, and "The Problems of Power and Mechanization," in A History of Technology and Invention: Progress Through the Ages, vol. 1, The Origins of Technological Civilization, ed. Maurice Daumas, trans. Eileen B. Hennessy (New York, 1969), 451, 458; Lynn White Jr., Medieval Technology and Social Change (Oxford, 1964), 88-89; Gimpel, 10-12.
15. Bloch's views on the medieval break with the ancient world can be found in "The Advent and Triumph of the Watermill," 143-46. They are echoed in the history of technology literature by, for example, Robert J. Forbes, "Power," in A History of Technology, ed. Charles Singer et al., vol. 2, The Mediterranean Civilizations and the Middle Ages, c. 700 B.C. to c. A.D. 1500 (London, 1956), 601-6; Lynn White Jr., Medieval Religion and Technology: Collected Essays (Berkeley, 1978), 22; Jean Gimpel, The Medieval Machine: The Industrial Revolution of the Middle Ages, 2nd ed. (London, 1988), 7-10; Terry S. Reynolds, Stronger than a Hundred Men: A History of the Vertical Water Wheel (Baltimore, 1983), 32-35, 45; George Basalla, The Evolution of Technology (Cambridge, 1988), 146-47. Bloch's comments on the role of monasticism in the spread of water-mill technology can be found in "The Advent and Triumph of the Watermill," 148, 150-52, and are echoed by Robert Forbes, "Metallurgy and Technology in the Middle Ages," in Essays on the Social History of Science, ed. Samuel Lilley (Copenhagen, 1953), 50-51; Lewis Mumford, The Myth of the Machine: Technics and Human Development (London, 1967), 263-71; Lynn White Jr., Dynamo and Virgin Reconsidered: Essays in the Dynamism of Western Culture (Cambridge, Mass., 1968), 63-66; Basalla, 148; J. Kenneth Major, "Water, Wind and Animal Power," in An Encyclopaedia of the History of Technology, ed. Ian McNeil (London, 1990), 232. Bloch's views on the revolutionary growth in the use of waterpower and wind power can be found in "The Advent and Triumph of the Water-mill," 141-42, 182, and are echoed in the work of Bertrand Gille, "Le moulin à eau: Une révolution technique médiévale," Techniques et Civilization 3 (1954): 1-15, and "The Problems of Power and Mechanization," in A History of Technology and Invention: Progress Through the Ages, vol. 1, The Origins of Technological Civilization, ed. Maurice Daumas, trans. Eileen B. Hennessy (New York, 1969), 451, 458; Lynn White Jr., Medieval Technology and Social Change (Oxford, 1964), 88-89; Gimpel, 10-12.
16. Bloch's views on the medieval break with the ancient world can be found in "The Advent and Triumph of the Watermill," 143-46. They are echoed in the history of technology literature by, for example, Robert J. Forbes, "Power," in A History of Technology, ed. Charles Singer et al., vol. 2, The Mediterranean Civilizations and the Middle Ages, c. 700 B.C. to c. A.D. 1500 (London, 1956), 601-6; Lynn White Jr., Medieval Religion and Technology: Collected Essays (Berkeley, 1978), 22; Jean Gimpel, The Medieval Machine: The Industrial Revolution of the Middle Ages, 2nd ed. (London, 1988), 7-10; Terry S. Reynolds, Stronger than a Hundred Men: A History of the Vertical Water Wheel (Baltimore, 1983), 32-35, 45; George Basalla, The Evolution of Technology (Cambridge, 1988), 146-47. Bloch's comments on the role of monasticism in the spread of water-mill technology can be found in "The Advent and Triumph of the Watermill," 148, 150-52, and are echoed by Robert Forbes, "Metallurgy and Technology in the Middle Ages," in Essays on the Social History of Science, ed. Samuel Lilley (Copenhagen, 1953), 50-51; Lewis Mumford, The Myth of the Machine: Technics and Human Development (London, 1967), 263-71; Lynn White Jr., Dynamo and Virgin Reconsidered: Essays in the Dynamism of Western Culture (Cambridge, Mass., 1968), 63-66; Basalla, 148; J. Kenneth Major, "Water, Wind and Animal Power," in An Encyclopaedia of the History of Technology, ed. Ian McNeil (London, 1990), 232. Bloch's views on the revolutionary growth in the use of waterpower and wind power can be found in "The Advent and Triumph of the Water-mill," 141-42, 182, and are echoed in the work of Bertrand Gille, "Le moulin à eau: Une révolution technique médiévale," Techniques et Civilization 3 (1954): 1-15, and "The Problems of Power and Mechanization," in A History of Technology and Invention: Progress Through the Ages, vol. 1, The Origins of Technological Civilization, ed. Maurice Daumas, trans. Eileen B. Hennessy (New York, 1969), 451, 458; Lynn White Jr., Medieval Technology and Social Change (Oxford, 1964), 88-89; Gimpel, 10-12.
17. Bloch's views on the medieval break with the ancient world can be found in "The Advent and Triumph of the Watermill," 143-46. They are echoed in the history of technology literature by, for example, Robert J. Forbes, "Power," in A History of Technology, ed. Charles Singer et al., vol. 2, The Mediterranean Civilizations and the Middle Ages, c. 700 B.C. to c. A.D. 1500 (London, 1956), 601-6; Lynn White Jr., Medieval Religion and Technology: Collected Essays (Berkeley, 1978), 22; Jean Gimpel, The Medieval Machine: The Industrial Revolution of the Middle Ages, 2nd ed. (London, 1988), 7-10; Terry S. Reynolds, Stronger than a Hundred Men: A History of the Vertical Water Wheel (Baltimore, 1983), 32-35, 45; George Basalla, The Evolution of Technology (Cambridge, 1988), 146-47. Bloch's comments on the role of monasticism in the spread of water-mill technology can be found in "The Advent and Triumph of the Watermill," 148, 150-52, and are echoed by Robert Forbes, "Metallurgy and Technology in the Middle Ages," in Essays on the Social History of Science, ed. Samuel Lilley (Copenhagen, 1953), 50-51; Lewis Mumford, The Myth of the Machine: Technics and Human Development (London, 1967), 263-71; Lynn White Jr., Dynamo and Virgin Reconsidered: Essays in the Dynamism of Western Culture (Cambridge, Mass., 1968), 63-66; Basalla, 148; J. Kenneth Major, "Water, Wind and Animal Power," in An Encyclopaedia of the History of Technology, ed. Ian McNeil (London, 1990), 232. Bloch's views on the revolutionary growth in the use of waterpower and wind power can be found in "The Advent and Triumph of the Water-mill," 141-42, 182, and are echoed in the work of Bertrand Gille, "Le moulin à eau: Une révolution technique médiévale," Techniques et Civilization 3 (1954): 1-15, and "The Problems of Power and Mechanization," in A History of Technology and Invention: Progress Through the Ages, vol. 1, The Origins of Technological Civilization, ed. Maurice Daumas, trans. Eileen B. Hennessy (New York, 1969), 451, 458; Lynn White Jr., Medieval Technology and Social Change (Oxford, 1964), 88-89; Gimpel, 10-12.
18. Bloch's views on the medieval break with the ancient world can be found in "The Advent and Triumph of the Watermill," 143-46. They are echoed in the history of technology literature by, for example, Robert J. Forbes, "Power," in A History of Technology, ed. Charles Singer et al., vol. 2, The Mediterranean Civilizations and the Middle Ages, c. 700 B.C. to c. A.D. 1500 (London, 1956), 601-6; Lynn White Jr., Medieval Religion and Technology: Collected Essays (Berkeley, 1978), 22; Jean Gimpel, The Medieval Machine: The Industrial Revolution of the Middle Ages, 2nd ed. (London, 1988), 7-10; Terry S. Reynolds, Stronger than a Hundred Men: A History of the Vertical Water Wheel (Baltimore, 1983), 32-35, 45; George Basalla, The Evolution of Technology (Cambridge, 1988), 146-47. Bloch's comments on the role of monasticism in the spread of water-mill technology can be found in "The Advent and Triumph of the Watermill," 148, 150-52, and are echoed by Robert Forbes, "Metallurgy and Technology in the Middle Ages," in Essays on the Social History of Science, ed. Samuel Lilley (Copenhagen, 1953), 50-51; Lewis Mumford, The Myth of the Machine: Technics and Human Development (London, 1967), 263-71; Lynn White Jr., Dynamo and Virgin Reconsidered: Essays in the Dynamism of Western Culture (Cambridge, Mass., 1968), 63-66; Basalla, 148; J. Kenneth Major, "Water, Wind and Animal Power," in An Encyclopaedia of the History of Technology, ed. Ian McNeil (London, 1990), 232. Bloch's views on the revolutionary growth in the use of waterpower and wind power can be found in "The Advent and Triumph of the Water-mill," 141-42, 182, and are echoed in the work of Bertrand Gille, "Le moulin à eau: Une révolution technique médiévale," Techniques et Civilization 3 (1954): 1-15, and "The Problems of Power and Mechanization," in A History of Technology and Invention: Progress Through the Ages, vol. 1, The Origins of Technological Civilization, ed. Maurice Daumas, trans. Eileen B. Hennessy (New York, 1969), 451, 458; Lynn White Jr., Medieval Technology and Social Change (Oxford, 1964), 88-89; Gimpel, 10-12.
19. Bloch's views on the medieval break with the ancient world can be found in "The Advent and Triumph of the Watermill," 143-46. They are echoed in the history of technology literature by, for example, Robert J. Forbes, "Power," in A History of Technology, ed. Charles Singer et al., vol. 2, The Mediterranean Civilizations and the Middle Ages, c. 700 B.C. to c. A.D. 1500 (London, 1956), 601-6; Lynn White Jr., Medieval Religion and Technology: Collected Essays (Berkeley, 1978), 22; Jean Gimpel, The Medieval Machine: The Industrial Revolution of the Middle Ages, 2nd ed. (London, 1988), 7-10; Terry S. Reynolds, Stronger than a Hundred Men: A History of the Vertical Water Wheel (Baltimore, 1983), 32-35, 45; George Basalla, The Evolution of Technology (Cambridge, 1988), 146-47. Bloch's comments on the role of monasticism in the spread of water-mill technology can be found in "The Advent and Triumph of the Watermill," 148, 150-52, and are echoed by Robert Forbes, "Metallurgy and Technology in the Middle Ages," in Essays on the Social History of Science, ed. Samuel Lilley (Copenhagen, 1953), 50-51; Lewis Mumford, The Myth of the Machine: Technics and Human Development (London, 1967), 263-71; Lynn White Jr., Dynamo and Virgin Reconsidered: Essays in the Dynamism of Western Culture (Cambridge, Mass., 1968), 63-66; Basalla, 148; J. Kenneth Major, "Water, Wind and Animal Power," in An Encyclopaedia of the History of Technology, ed. Ian McNeil (London, 1990), 232. Bloch's views on the revolutionary growth in the use of waterpower and wind power can be found in "The Advent and Triumph of the Water-mill," 141-42, 182, and are echoed in the work of Bertrand Gille, "Le moulin à eau: Une révolution technique médiévale," Techniques et Civilization 3 (1954): 1-15, and "The Problems of Power and Mechanization," in A History of Technology and Invention: Progress Through the Ages, vol. 1, The Origins of Technological Civilization, ed. Maurice Daumas, trans. Eileen B. Hennessy (New York, 1969), 451, 458; Lynn White Jr., Medieval Technology and Social Change (Oxford, 1964), 88-89; Gimpel, 10-12.
20. Bloch's views on the medieval break with the ancient world can be found in "The Advent and Triumph of the Watermill," 143-46. They are echoed in the history of technology literature by, for example, Robert J. Forbes, "Power," in A History of Technology, ed. Charles Singer et al., vol. 2, The Mediterranean Civilizations and the Middle Ages, c. 700 B.C. to c. A.D. 1500 (London, 1956), 601-6; Lynn White Jr., Medieval Religion and Technology: Collected Essays (Berkeley, 1978), 22; Jean Gimpel, The Medieval Machine: The Industrial Revolution of the Middle Ages, 2nd ed. (London, 1988), 7-10; Terry S. Reynolds, Stronger than a Hundred Men: A History of the Vertical Water Wheel (Baltimore, 1983), 32-35, 45; George Basalla, The Evolution of Technology (Cambridge, 1988), 146-47. Bloch's comments on the role of monasticism in the spread of water-mill technology can be found in "The Advent and Triumph of the Watermill," 148, 150-52, and are echoed by Robert Forbes, "Metallurgy and Technology in the Middle Ages," in Essays on the Social History of Science, ed. Samuel Lilley (Copenhagen, 1953), 50-51; Lewis Mumford, The Myth of the Machine: Technics and Human Development (London, 1967), 263-71; Lynn White Jr., Dynamo and Virgin Reconsidered: Essays in the Dynamism of Western Culture (Cambridge, Mass., 1968), 63-66; Basalla, 148; J. Kenneth Major, "Water, Wind and Animal Power," in An Encyclopaedia of the History of Technology, ed. Ian McNeil (London, 1990), 232. Bloch's views on the revolutionary growth in the use of waterpower and wind power can be found in "The Advent and Triumph of the Water-mill," 141-42, 182, and are echoed in the work of Bertrand Gille, "Le moulin à eau: Une révolution technique médiévale," Techniques et Civilization 3 (1954): 1-15, and "The Problems of Power and Mechanization," in A History of Technology and Invention: Progress Through the Ages, vol. 1, The Origins of Technological Civilization, ed. Maurice Daumas, trans. Eileen B. Hennessy (New York, 1969), 451, 458; Lynn White Jr., Medieval Technology and Social Change (Oxford, 1964), 88-89; Gimpel, 10-12.
21. Bloch's views on the medieval break with the ancient world can be found in "The Advent and Triumph of the Watermill," 143-46. They are echoed in the history of technology literature by, for example, Robert J. Forbes, "Power," in A History of Technology, ed. Charles Singer et al., vol. 2, The Mediterranean Civilizations and the Middle Ages, c. 700 B.C. to c. A.D. 1500 (London, 1956), 601-6; Lynn White Jr., Medieval Religion and Technology: Collected Essays (Berkeley, 1978), 22; Jean Gimpel, The Medieval Machine: The Industrial Revolution of the Middle Ages, 2nd ed. (London, 1988), 7-10; Terry S. Reynolds, Stronger than a Hundred Men: A History of the Vertical Water Wheel (Baltimore, 1983), 32-35, 45; George Basalla, The Evolution of Technology (Cambridge, 1988), 146-47. Bloch's comments on the role of monasticism in the spread of water-mill technology can be found in "The Advent and Triumph of the Watermill," 148, 150-52, and are echoed by Robert Forbes, "Metallurgy and Technology in the Middle Ages," in Essays on the Social History of Science, ed. Samuel Lilley (Copenhagen, 1953), 50-51; Lewis Mumford, The Myth of the Machine: Technics and Human Development (London, 1967), 263-71; Lynn White Jr., Dynamo and Virgin Reconsidered: Essays in the Dynamism of Western Culture (Cambridge, Mass., 1968), 63-66; Basalla, 148; J. Kenneth Major, "Water, Wind and Animal Power," in An Encyclopaedia of the History of Technology, ed. Ian McNeil (London, 1990), 232. Bloch's views on the revolutionary growth in the use of waterpower and wind power can be found in "The Advent and Triumph of the Water-mill," 141-42, 182, and are echoed in the work of Bertrand Gille, "Le moulin à eau: Une révolution technique médiévale," Techniques et Civilization 3 (1954): 1-15, and "The Problems of Power and Mechanization," in A History of Technology and Invention: Progress Through the Ages, vol. 1, The Origins of Technological Civilization, ed. Maurice Daumas, trans. Eileen B. Hennessy (New York, 1969), 451, 458; Lynn White Jr., Medieval Technology and Social Change (Oxford, 1964), 88-89; Gimpel, 10-12.
22. Bloch's views on the medieval break with the ancient world can be found in "The Advent and Triumph of the Watermill," 143-46. They are echoed in the history of technology literature by, for example, Robert J. Forbes, "Power," in A History of Technology, ed. Charles Singer et al., vol. 2, The Mediterranean Civilizations and the Middle Ages, c. 700 B.C. to c. A.D. 1500 (London, 1956), 601-6; Lynn White Jr., Medieval Religion and Technology: Collected Essays (Berkeley, 1978), 22; Jean Gimpel, The Medieval Machine: The Industrial Revolution of the Middle Ages, 2nd ed. (London, 1988), 7-10; Terry S. Reynolds, Stronger than a Hundred Men: A History of the Vertical Water Wheel (Baltimore, 1983), 32-35, 45; George Basalla, The Evolution of Technology (Cambridge, 1988), 146-47. Bloch's comments on the role of monasticism in the spread of water-mill technology can be found in "The Advent and Triumph of the Watermill," 148, 150-52, and are echoed by Robert Forbes, "Metallurgy and Technology in the Middle Ages," in Essays on the Social History of Science, ed. Samuel Lilley (Copenhagen, 1953), 50-51; Lewis Mumford, The Myth of the Machine: Technics and Human Development (London, 1967), 263-71; Lynn White Jr., Dynamo and Virgin Reconsidered: Essays in the Dynamism of Western Culture (Cambridge, Mass., 1968), 63-66; Basalla, 148; J. Kenneth Major, "Water, Wind and Animal Power," in An Encyclopaedia of the History of Technology, ed. Ian McNeil (London, 1990), 232. Bloch's views on the revolutionary growth in the use of waterpower and wind power can be found in "The Advent and Triumph of the Water-mill," 141-42, 182, and are echoed in the work of Bertrand Gille, "Le moulin à eau: Une révolution technique médiévale," Techniques et Civilization 3 (1954): 1-15, and "The Problems of Power and Mechanization," in A History of Technology and Invention: Progress Through the Ages, vol. 1, The Origins of Technological Civilization, ed. Maurice Daumas, trans. Eileen B. Hennessy (New York, 1969), 451, 458; Lynn White Jr., Medieval Technology and Social Change (Oxford, 1964), 88-89; Gimpel, 10-12.
23. Bloch's views on the medieval break with the ancient world can be found in "The Advent and Triumph of the Watermill," 143-46. They are echoed in the history of technology literature by, for example, Robert J. Forbes, "Power," in A History of Technology, ed. Charles Singer et al., vol. 2, The Mediterranean Civilizations and the Middle Ages, c. 700 B.C. to c. A.D. 1500 (London, 1956), 601-6; Lynn White Jr., Medieval Religion and Technology: Collected Essays (Berkeley, 1978), 22; Jean Gimpel, The Medieval Machine: The Industrial Revolution of the Middle Ages, 2nd ed. (London, 1988), 7-10; Terry S. Reynolds, Stronger than a Hundred Men: A History of the Vertical Water Wheel (Baltimore, 1983), 32-35, 45; George Basalla, The Evolution of Technology (Cambridge, 1988), 146-47. Bloch's comments on the role of monasticism in the spread of water-mill technology can be found in "The Advent and Triumph of the Watermill," 148, 150-52, and are echoed by Robert Forbes, "Metallurgy and Technology in the Middle Ages," in Essays on the Social History of Science, ed. Samuel Lilley (Copenhagen, 1953), 50-51; Lewis Mumford, The Myth of the Machine: Technics and Human Development (London, 1967), 263-71; Lynn White Jr., Dynamo and Virgin Reconsidered: Essays in the Dynamism of Western Culture (Cambridge, Mass., 1968), 63-66; Basalla, 148; J. Kenneth Major, "Water, Wind and Animal Power," in An Encyclopaedia of the History of Technology, ed. Ian McNeil (London, 1990), 232. Bloch's views on the revolutionary growth in the use of waterpower and wind power can be found in "The Advent and Triumph of the Water-mill," 141-42, 182, and are echoed in the work of Bertrand Gille, "Le moulin à eau: Une révolution technique médiévale," Techniques et Civilization 3 (1954): 1-15, and "The Problems of Power and Mechanization," in A History of Technology and Invention: Progress Through the Ages, vol. 1, The Origins of Technological Civilization, ed. Maurice Daumas, trans. Eileen B. Hennessy (New York, 1969), 451, 458; Lynn White Jr., Medieval Technology and Social Change (Oxford, 1964), 88-89; Gimpel, 10-12.
24. Margaret Hodgen, "Domesday Water Mills," Antiquity 13 (1939): 261-79. Although Hodgen did not go as far as some of her colleagues in asserting the revolutionary role of the water mill in medieval society, she did argue that its widespread diffusion throughout Anglo-Saxon England constituted "a far-reaching cultural and technological change" in the material culture of England and that "the distribution of Saxon watermills at the time of the Norman conquest forms a background against which to consider the utilization of water power in the later industrialization of England" (p. 262). Hodgen's figure for Domesday mills has been cited by numerous scholars: see, for example, Samuel Lilley, Men, Machines and History: A Short History of Tools and Machines in Relation to Social Progress (London, 1948), 37; Forbes, "Power," 611; W. H. G. Armytage, A Social History of Engineering (London, 1961), 47; White, Medieval Technology and Social Change, 84, and Medieval Religion and Technology, 67; Gille, "The Problems of Power and Mechanization," 451; T. K. Derry and T. I. Williams, A Short History of Technology: From the Earliest Times to A.D. 1900 (London, 1970), 253; Reynolds, 52, 64; Gimpel, 10-12; and Major, 231. It was first challenged in the late 1950s by Reginald Lennard as being too low, and in the mid-1970s H. C. Darby and his colleagues calculated the now accepted figure of 6,082 mills: see R. Lennard, Rural England: 1086-1135 (Oxford, 1959), 278-80, and H. C. Darby, Domesday England (Cambridge, 1977), 361. See Richard Holt, The Mills of Medieval England (Oxford, 1988), 7-8, 11, for a cogent examination of the problems with Hodgen's figure and her broader theory. Holt has argued more recently that there were probably around 6,500 water mills throughout England at Domesday if estimates for mill numbers in the poorly recorded north are taken into account.
25. Margaret Hodgen, "Domesday Water Mills," Antiquity 13 (1939): 261-79. Although Hodgen did not go as far as some of her colleagues in asserting the revolutionary role of the water mill in medieval society, she did argue that its widespread diffusion throughout Anglo-Saxon England constituted "a far-reaching cultural and technological change" in the material culture of England and that "the distribution of Saxon watermills at the time of the Norman conquest forms a background against which to consider the utilization of water power in the later industrialization of England" (p. 262). Hodgen's figure for Domesday mills has been cited by numerous scholars: see, for example, Samuel Lilley, Men, Machines and History: A Short History of Tools and Machines in Relation to Social Progress (London, 1948), 37; Forbes, "Power," 611; W. H. G. Armytage, A Social History of Engineering (London, 1961), 47; White, Medieval Technology and Social Change, 84, and Medieval Religion and Technology, 67; Gille, "The Problems of Power and Mechanization," 451; T. K. Derry and T. I. Williams, A Short History of Technology: From the Earliest Times to A.D. 1900 (London, 1970), 253; Reynolds, 52, 64; Gimpel, 10-12; and Major, 231. It was first challenged in the late 1950s by Reginald Lennard as being too low, and in the mid-1970s H. C. Darby and his colleagues calculated the now accepted figure of 6,082 mills: see R. Lennard, Rural England: 1086-1135 (Oxford, 1959), 278-80, and H. C. Darby, Domesday England (Cambridge, 1977), 361. See Richard Holt, The Mills of Medieval England (Oxford, 1988), 7-8, 11, for a cogent examination of the problems with Hodgen's figure and her broader theory. Holt has argued more recently that there were probably around 6,500 water mills throughout England at Domesday if estimates for mill numbers in the poorly recorded north are taken into account.
26. Margaret Hodgen, "Domesday Water Mills," Antiquity 13 (1939): 261-79. Although Hodgen did not go as far as some of her colleagues in asserting the revolutionary role of the water mill in medieval society, she did argue that its widespread diffusion throughout Anglo-Saxon England constituted "a far-reaching cultural and technological change" in the material culture of England and that "the distribution of Saxon watermills at the time of the Norman conquest forms a background against which to consider the utilization of water power in the later industrialization of England" (p. 262). Hodgen's figure for Domesday mills has been cited by numerous scholars: see, for example, Samuel Lilley, Men, Machines and History: A Short History of Tools and Machines in Relation to Social Progress (London, 1948), 37; Forbes, "Power," 611; W. H. G. Armytage, A Social History of Engineering (London, 1961), 47; White, Medieval Technology and Social Change, 84, and Medieval Religion and Technology, 67; Gille, "The Problems of Power and Mechanization," 451; T. K. Derry and T. I. Williams, A Short History of Technology: From the Earliest Times to A.D. 1900 (London, 1970), 253; Reynolds, 52, 64; Gimpel, 10-12; and Major, 231. It was first challenged in the late 1950s by Reginald Lennard as being too low, and in the mid-1970s H. C. Darby and his colleagues calculated the now accepted figure of 6,082 mills: see R. Lennard, Rural England: 1086-1135 (Oxford, 1959), 278-80, and H. C. Darby, Domesday England (Cambridge, 1977), 361. See Richard Holt, The Mills of Medieval England (Oxford, 1988), 7-8, 11, for a cogent examination of the problems with Hodgen's figure and her broader theory. Holt has argued more recently that there were probably around 6,500 water mills throughout England at Domesday if estimates for mill numbers in the poorly recorded north are taken into account.
27. Margaret Hodgen, "Domesday Water Mills," Antiquity 13 (1939): 261-79. Although Hodgen did not go as far as some of her colleagues in asserting the revolutionary role of the water mill in medieval society, she did argue that its widespread diffusion throughout Anglo-Saxon England constituted "a far-reaching cultural and technological change" in the material culture of England and that "the distribution of Saxon watermills at the time of the Norman conquest forms a background against which to consider the utilization of water power in the later industrialization of England" (p. 262). Hodgen's figure for Domesday mills has been cited by numerous scholars: see, for example, Samuel Lilley, Men, Machines and History: A Short History of Tools and Machines in Relation to Social Progress (London, 1948), 37; Forbes, "Power," 611; W. H. G. Armytage, A Social History of Engineering (London, 1961), 47; White, Medieval Technology and Social Change, 84, and Medieval Religion and Technology, 67; Gille, "The Problems of Power and Mechanization," 451; T. K. Derry and T. I. Williams, A Short History of Technology: From the Earliest Times to A.D. 1900 (London, 1970), 253; Reynolds, 52, 64; Gimpel, 10-12; and Major, 231. It was first challenged in the late 1950s by Reginald Lennard as being too low, and in the mid-1970s H. C. Darby and his colleagues calculated the now accepted figure of 6,082 mills: see R. Lennard, Rural England: 1086-1135 (Oxford, 1959), 278-80, and H. C. Darby, Domesday England (Cambridge, 1977), 361. See Richard Holt, The Mills of Medieval England (Oxford, 1988), 7-8, 11, for a cogent examination of the problems with Hodgen's figure and her broader theory. Holt has argued more recently that there were probably around 6,500 water mills throughout England at Domesday if estimates for mill numbers in the poorly recorded north are taken into account.
28. Margaret Hodgen, "Domesday Water Mills," Antiquity 13 (1939): 261-79. Although Hodgen did not go as far as some of her colleagues in asserting the revolutionary role of the water mill in medieval society, she did argue that its widespread diffusion throughout Anglo-Saxon England constituted "a far-reaching cultural and technological change" in the material culture of England and that "the distribution of Saxon watermills at the time of the Norman conquest forms a background against which to consider the utilization of water power in the later industrialization of England" (p. 262). Hodgen's figure for Domesday mills has been cited by numerous scholars: see, for example, Samuel Lilley, Men, Machines and History: A Short History of Tools and Machines in Relation to Social Progress (London, 1948), 37; Forbes, "Power," 611; W. H. G. Armytage, A Social History of Engineering (London, 1961), 47; White, Medieval Technology and Social Change, 84, and Medieval Religion and Technology, 67; Gille, "The Problems of Power and Mechanization," 451; T. K. Derry and T. I. Williams, A Short History of Technology: From the Earliest Times to A.D. 1900 (London, 1970), 253; Reynolds, 52, 64; Gimpel, 10-12; and Major, 231. It was first challenged in the late 1950s by Reginald Lennard as being too low, and in the mid-1970s H. C. Darby and his colleagues calculated the now accepted figure of 6,082 mills: see R. Lennard, Rural England: 1086-1135 (Oxford, 1959), 278-80, and H. C. Darby, Domesday England (Cambridge, 1977), 361. See Richard Holt, The Mills of Medieval England (Oxford, 1988), 7-8, 11, for a cogent examination of the problems with Hodgen's figure and her broader theory. Holt has argued more recently that there were probably around 6,500 water mills throughout England at Domesday if estimates for mill numbers in the poorly recorded north are taken into account.
29. Margaret Hodgen, "Domesday Water Mills," Antiquity 13 (1939): 261-79. Although Hodgen did not go as far as some of her colleagues in asserting the revolutionary role of the water mill in medieval society, she did argue that its widespread diffusion throughout Anglo-Saxon England constituted "a far-reaching cultural and technological change" in the material culture of England and that "the distribution of Saxon watermills at the time of the Norman conquest forms a background against which to consider the utilization of water power in the later industrialization of England" (p. 262). Hodgen's figure for Domesday mills has been cited by numerous scholars: see, for example, Samuel Lilley, Men, Machines and History: A Short History of Tools and Machines in Relation to Social Progress (London, 1948), 37; Forbes, "Power," 611; W. H. G. Armytage, A Social History of Engineering (London, 1961), 47; White, Medieval Technology and Social Change, 84, and Medieval Religion and Technology, 67; Gille, "The Problems of Power and Mechanization," 451; T. K. Derry and T. I. Williams, A Short History of Technology: From the Earliest Times to A.D. 1900 (London, 1970), 253; Reynolds, 52, 64; Gimpel, 10-12; and Major, 231. It was first challenged in the late 1950s by Reginald Lennard as being too low, and in the mid-1970s H. C. Darby and his colleagues calculated the now accepted figure of 6,082 mills: see R. Lennard, Rural England: 1086-1135 (Oxford, 1959), 278-80, and H. C. Darby, Domesday England (Cambridge, 1977), 361. See Richard Holt, The Mills of Medieval England (Oxford, 1988), 7-8, 11, for a cogent examination of the problems with Hodgen's figure and her broader theory. Holt has argued more recently that there were probably around 6,500 water mills throughout England at Domesday if estimates for mill numbers in the poorly recorded north are taken into account.
30. Margaret Hodgen, "Domesday Water Mills," Antiquity 13 (1939): 261-79. Although Hodgen did not go as far as some of her colleagues in asserting the revolutionary role of the water mill in medieval society, she did argue that its widespread diffusion throughout Anglo-Saxon England constituted "a far-reaching cultural and technological change" in the material culture of England and that "the distribution of Saxon watermills at the time of the Norman conquest forms a background against which to consider the utilization of water power in the later industrialization of England" (p. 262). Hodgen's figure for Domesday mills has been cited by numerous scholars: see, for example, Samuel Lilley, Men, Machines and History: A Short History of Tools and Machines in Relation to Social Progress (London, 1948), 37; Forbes, "Power," 611; W. H. G. Armytage, A Social History of Engineering (London, 1961), 47; White, Medieval Technology and Social Change, 84, and Medieval Religion and Technology, 67; Gille, "The Problems of Power and Mechanization," 451; T. K. Derry and T. I. Williams, A Short History of Technology: From the Earliest Times to A.D. 1900 (London, 1970), 253; Reynolds, 52, 64; Gimpel, 10-12; and Major, 231. It was first challenged in the late 1950s by Reginald Lennard as being too low, and in the mid-1970s H. C. Darby and his colleagues calculated the now accepted figure of 6,082 mills: see R. Lennard, Rural England: 1086-1135 (Oxford, 1959), 278-80, and H. C. Darby, Domesday England (Cambridge, 1977), 361. See Richard Holt, The Mills of Medieval England (Oxford, 1988), 7-8, 11, for a cogent examination of the problems with Hodgen's figure and her broader theory. Holt has argued more recently that there were probably around 6,500 water mills throughout England at Domesday if estimates for mill numbers in the poorly recorded north are taken into account.
31. Margaret Hodgen, "Domesday Water Mills," Antiquity 13 (1939): 261-79. Although Hodgen did not go as far as some of her colleagues in asserting the revolutionary role of the water mill in medieval society, she did argue that its widespread diffusion throughout Anglo-Saxon England constituted "a far-reaching cultural and technological change" in the material culture of England and that "the distribution of Saxon watermills at the time of the Norman conquest forms a background against which to consider the utilization of water power in the later industrialization of England" (p. 262). Hodgen's figure for Domesday mills has been cited by numerous scholars: see, for example, Samuel Lilley, Men, Machines and History: A Short History of Tools and Machines in Relation to Social Progress (London, 1948), 37; Forbes, "Power," 611; W. H. G. Armytage, A Social History of Engineering (London, 1961), 47; White, Medieval Technology and Social Change, 84, and Medieval Religion and Technology, 67; Gille, "The Problems of Power and Mechanization," 451; T. K. Derry and T. I. Williams, A Short History of Technology: From the Earliest Times to A.D. 1900 (London, 1970), 253; Reynolds, 52, 64; Gimpel, 10-12; and Major, 231. It was first challenged in the late 1950s by Reginald Lennard as being too low, and in the mid-1970s H. C. Darby and his colleagues calculated the now accepted figure of 6,082 mills: see R. Lennard, Rural England: 1086-1135 (Oxford, 1959), 278-80, and H. C. Darby, Domesday England (Cambridge, 1977), 361. See Richard Holt, The Mills of Medieval England (Oxford, 1988), 7-8, 11, for a cogent examination of the problems with Hodgen's figure and her broader theory. Holt has argued more recently that there were probably around 6,500 water mills throughout England at Domesday if estimates for mill numbers in the poorly recorded north are taken into account.
32. Margaret Hodgen, "Domesday Water Mills," Antiquity 13 (1939): 261-79. Although Hodgen did not go as far as some of her colleagues in asserting the revolutionary role of the water mill in medieval society, she did argue that its widespread diffusion throughout Anglo-Saxon England constituted "a far-reaching cultural and technological change" in the material culture of England and that "the distribution of Saxon watermills at the time of the Norman conquest forms a background against which to consider the utilization of water power in the later industrialization of England" (p. 262). Hodgen's figure for Domesday mills has been cited by numerous scholars: see, for example, Samuel Lilley, Men, Machines and History: A Short History of Tools and Machines in Relation to Social Progress (London, 1948), 37; Forbes, "Power," 611; W. H. G. Armytage, A Social History of Engineering (London, 1961), 47; White, Medieval Technology and Social Change, 84, and Medieval Religion and Technology, 67; Gille, "The Problems of Power and Mechanization," 451; T. K. Derry and T. I. Williams, A Short History of Technology: From the Earliest Times to A.D. 1900 (London, 1970), 253; Reynolds, 52, 64; Gimpel, 10-12; and Major, 231. It was first challenged in the late 1950s by Reginald Lennard as being too low, and in the mid-1970s H. C. Darby and his colleagues calculated the now accepted figure of 6,082 mills: see R. Lennard, Rural England: 1086-1135 (Oxford, 1959), 278-80, and H. C. Darby, Domesday England (Cambridge, 1977), 361. See Richard Holt, The Mills of Medieval England (Oxford, 1988), 7-8, 11, for a cogent examination of the problems with Hodgen's figure and her broader theory. Holt has argued more recently that there were probably around 6,500 water mills throughout England at Domesday if estimates for mill numbers in the poorly recorded north are taken into account.
33. Margaret Hodgen, "Domesday Water Mills," Antiquity 13 (1939): 261-79. Although Hodgen did not go as far as some of her colleagues in asserting the revolutionary role of the water mill in medieval society, she did argue that its widespread diffusion throughout Anglo-Saxon England constituted "a far-reaching cultural and technological change" in the material culture of England and that "the distribution of Saxon watermills at the time of the Norman conquest forms a background against which to consider the utilization of water power in the later industrialization of England" (p. 262). Hodgen's figure for Domesday mills has been cited by numerous scholars: see, for example, Samuel Lilley, Men, Machines and History: A Short History of Tools and Machines in Relation to Social Progress (London, 1948), 37; Forbes, "Power," 611; W. H. G. Armytage, A Social History of Engineering (London, 1961), 47; White, Medieval Technology and Social Change, 84, and Medieval Religion and Technology, 67; Gille, "The Problems of Power and Mechanization," 451; T. K. Derry and T. I. Williams, A Short History of Technology: From the Earliest Times to A.D. 1900 (London, 1970), 253; Reynolds, 52, 64; Gimpel, 10-12; and Major, 231. It was first challenged in the late 1950s by Reginald Lennard as being too low, and in the mid-1970s H. C. Darby and his colleagues calculated the now accepted figure of 6,082 mills: see R. Lennard, Rural England: 1086-1135 (Oxford, 1959), 278-80, and H. C. Darby, Domesday England (Cambridge, 1977), 361. See Richard Holt, The Mills of Medieval England (Oxford, 1988), 7-8, 11, for a cogent examination of the problems with Hodgen's figure and her broader theory. Holt has argued more recently that there were probably around 6,500 water mills throughout England at Domesday if estimates for mill numbers in the poorly recorded north are taken into account.
34. Margaret Hodgen, "Domesday Water Mills," Antiquity 13 (1939): 261-79. Although Hodgen did not go as far as some of her colleagues in asserting the revolutionary role of the water mill in medieval society, she did argue that its widespread diffusion throughout Anglo-Saxon England constituted "a far-reaching cultural and technological change" in the material culture of England and that "the distribution of Saxon watermills at the time of the Norman conquest forms a background against which to consider the utilization of water power in the later industrialization of England" (p. 262). Hodgen's figure for Domesday mills has been cited by numerous scholars: see, for example, Samuel Lilley, Men, Machines and History: A Short History of Tools and Machines in Relation to Social Progress (London, 1948), 37; Forbes, "Power," 611; W. H. G. Armytage, A Social History of Engineering (London, 1961), 47; White, Medieval Technology and Social Change, 84, and Medieval Religion and Technology, 67; Gille, "The Problems of Power and Mechanization," 451; T. K. Derry and T. I. Williams, A Short History of Technology: From the Earliest Times to A.D. 1900 (London, 1970), 253; Reynolds, 52, 64; Gimpel, 10-12; and Major, 231. It was first challenged in the late 1950s by Reginald Lennard as being too low, and in the mid-1970s H. C. Darby and his colleagues calculated the now accepted figure of 6,082 mills: see R. Lennard, Rural England: 1086-1135 (Oxford, 1959), 278-80, and H. C. Darby, Domesday England (Cambridge, 1977), 361. See Richard Holt, The Mills of Medieval England (Oxford, 1988), 7-8, 11, for a cogent examination of the problems with Hodgen's figure and her broader theory. Holt has argued more recently that there were probably around 6,500 water mills throughout England at Domesday if estimates for mill numbers in the poorly recorded north are taken into account.
35. For cited references to Carus-Wilson's findings on industrial mills in England in the history of technology literature, see, for example, Forbes, "Power," 611; Armytage, 47; White, Medieval Religion and Technology, 54, and Medieval Technology and Social Change, 89; Gimpel, 15-16. For uncited references, see White, Medieval Religion and Technology, 66, and Gille, "The Problems of Power and Mechanization," 456. 8. The longest list of factors precluding ancient technological development is given by Forbes, "Power," 601-6.
36. For cited references to Carus-Wilson's findings on industrial mills in England in the history of technology literature, see, for example, Forbes, "Power," 611; Armytage, 47; White, Medieval Religion and Technology, 54, and Medieval Technology and Social Change, 89; Gimpel, 15-16. For uncited references, see White, Medieval Religion and Technology, 66, and Gille, "The Problems of Power and Mechanization," 456. 8. The longest list of factors precluding ancient technological development is given by Forbes, "Power," 601-6.
37. For cited references to Carus-Wilson's findings on industrial mills in England in the history of technology literature, see, for example, Forbes, "Power," 611; Armytage, 47; White, Medieval Religion and Technology, 54, and Medieval Technology and Social Change, 89; Gimpel, 15-16. For uncited references, see White, Medieval Religion and Technology, 66, and Gille, "The Problems of Power and Mechanization," 456. 8. The longest list of factors precluding ancient technological development is given by Forbes, "Power," 601-6.
38. For cited references to Carus-Wilson's findings on industrial mills in England in the history of technology literature, see, for example, Forbes, "Power," 611; Armytage, 47; White, Medieval Religion and Technology, 54, and Medieval Technology and Social Change, 89; Gimpel, 15-16. For uncited references, see White, Medieval Religion and Technology, 66, and Gille, "The Problems of Power and Mechanization," 456. 8. The longest list of factors precluding ancient technological development is given by Forbes, "Power," 601-6.
39. For cited references to Carus-Wilson's findings on industrial mills in England in the history of technology literature, see, for example, Forbes, "Power," 611; Armytage, 47; White, Medieval Religion and Technology, 54, and Medieval Technology and Social Change, 89; Gimpel, 15-16. For uncited references, see White, Medieval Religion and Technology, 66, and Gille, "The Problems of Power and Mechanization," 456. 8. The longest list of factors precluding ancient technological development is given by Forbes, "Power," 601-6.
40. For cited references to Carus-Wilson's findings on industrial mills in England in the history of technology literature, see, for example, Forbes, "Power," 611; Armytage, 47; White, Medieval Religion and Technology, 54, and Medieval Technology and Social Change, 89; Gimpel, 15-16. For uncited references, see White, Medieval Religion and Technology, 66, and Gille, "The Problems of Power and Mechanization," 456. 8. The longest list of factors precluding ancient technological development is given by Forbes, "Power," 601-6.
41. For cited references to Carus-Wilson's findings on industrial mills in England in the history of technology literature, see, for example, Forbes,
42. On the origins of the cam and trip-hammer, see White, Medieval Technology and Social Change, 79-83. White's views on the origins and diffusion of the crank can be found in the same book, 104-10, 113-16, 118, 119, 167-68; see also "The Expansion of Technology, 500-1500," in The Fontana Economic History of Europe, vol. 1, The Middle Ages, ed. Carlo M. Cipolla (London, 1972), 157, and Medieval Religion and Technology, 17-18, 49, 186. For a more recent assessment of the significance of these various mechanical innovations and their origins, see Reynolds, 23, 26, 28, 29, 70-94, 115, 116. While I do not have the time or space to go into these issues in detail here, it now seems likely that not only the cam but also the trip-hammer and crank were first developed in the late classical period. Discussions of the latest occidental evidence can be found in Michael J. T. Lewis, Millstone and Hammer: The Origins of Water Power (Hull, 1997), and Wikander, "Industrial Applications of Water-Power," 408-10. John Peter Oleson argues that the crank was probably not known to the Romans, although he does not make it clear to what kind of device he is referring when using this term; see "Water-Lifting," in Wikander, Handbook of Ancient Water Technology, 263. It seems likely that something resembling a crank handle was used to turn the device known as the Antikythera mechanism; see Derek J. de Solla Price, Gears from the Greeks: The Antikythera Mechanism-A Calendar Computer from ca. 80 BC (New York, 1965). Joseph Needham notes that the eccentrically placed handles on many rotary querns from the Roman period "constitute a crank"; Science and Civilisation in China, vol. 4, Physics and Physical Technology, pt. 2, Mechanical Engineering (Cambridge, 1965), 186. If we take the purist view of what constitutes a crank, it remains unclear how long before the eighth century the crank handle was commonly used in the West, although it was certainly known in China by the Han dynasty (206 B.C.E. to 220 C.E.); see Needham, 111-18, 374, 378-79. The more sophisticated mechanisms of the crank and connecting rod appear to be early medieval developments; see Lewis, 6, 84, 112, 114.
43. On the origins of the cam and trip-hammer, see White, Medieval Technology and Social Change, 79-83. White's views on the origins and diffusion of the crank can be found in the same book, 104-10, 113-16, 118, 119, 167-68; see also "The Expansion of Technology, 500-1500," in The Fontana Economic History of Europe, vol. 1, The Middle Ages, ed. Carlo M. Cipolla (London, 1972), 157, and Medieval Religion and Technology, 17-18, 49, 186. For a more recent assessment of the significance of these various mechanical innovations and their origins, see Reynolds, 23, 26, 28, 29, 70-94, 115, 116. While I do not have the time or space to go into these issues in detail here, it now seems likely that not only the cam but also the trip-hammer and crank were first developed in the late classical period. Discussions of the latest occidental evidence can be found in Michael J. T. Lewis, Millstone and Hammer: The Origins of Water Power (Hull, 1997), and Wikander, "Industrial Applications of Water-Power," 408-10. John Peter Oleson argues that the crank was probably not known to the Romans, although he does not make it clear to what kind of device he is referring when using this term; see "Water-Lifting," in Wikander, Handbook of Ancient Water Technology, 263. It seems likely that something resembling a crank handle was used to turn the device known as the Antikythera mechanism; see Derek J. de Solla Price, Gears from the Greeks: The Antikythera Mechanism-A Calendar Computer from ca. 80 BC (New York, 1965). Joseph Needham notes that the eccentrically placed handles on many rotary querns from the Roman period "constitute a crank"; Science and Civilisation in China, vol. 4, Physics and Physical Technology, pt. 2, Mechanical Engineering (Cambridge, 1965), 186. If we take the purist view of what constitutes a crank, it remains unclear how long before the eighth century the crank handle was commonly used in the West, although it was certainly known in China by the Han dynasty (206 B.C.E. to 220 C.E.); see Needham, 111-18, 374, 378-79. The more sophisticated mechanisms of the crank and connecting rod appear to be early medieval developments; see Lewis, 6, 84, 112, 114.
44. On the origins of the cam and trip-hammer, see White, Medieval Technology and Social Change, 79-83. White's views on the origins and diffusion of the crank can be found in the same book, 104-10, 113-16, 118, 119, 167-68; see also "The Expansion of Technology, 500-1500," in The Fontana Economic History of Europe, vol. 1, The Middle Ages, ed. Carlo M. Cipolla (London, 1972), 157, and Medieval Religion and Technology, 17-18, 49, 186. For a more recent assessment of the significance of these various mechanical innovations and their origins, see Reynolds, 23, 26, 28, 29, 70-94, 115, 116. While I do not have the time or space to go into these issues in detail here, it now seems likely that not only the cam but also the trip-hammer and crank were first developed in the late classical period. Discussions of the latest occidental evidence can be found in Michael J. T. Lewis, Millstone and Hammer: The Origins of Water Power (Hull, 1997), and Wikander, "Industrial Applications of Water-Power," 408-10. John Peter Oleson argues that the crank was probably not known to the Romans, although he does not make it clear to what kind of device he is referring when using this term; see "Water-Lifting," in Wikander, Handbook of Ancient Water Technology, 263. It seems likely that something resembling a crank handle was used to turn the device known as the Antikythera mechanism; see Derek J. de Solla Price, Gears from the Greeks: The Antikythera Mechanism-A Calendar Computer from ca. 80 BC (New York, 1965). Joseph Needham notes that the eccentrically placed handles on many rotary querns from the Roman period "constitute a crank"; Science and Civilisation in China, vol. 4, Physics and Physical Technology, pt. 2, Mechanical Engineering (Cambridge, 1965), 186. If we take the purist view of what constitutes a crank, it remains unclear how long before the eighth century the crank handle was commonly used in the West, although it was certainly known in China by the Han dynasty (206 B.C.E. to 220 C.E.); see Needham, 111-18, 374, 378-79. The more sophisticated mechanisms of the crank and connecting rod appear to be early medieval developments; see Lewis, 6, 84, 112, 114.
45. On the origins of the cam and trip-hammer, see White, Medieval Technology and Social Change, 79-83. White's views on the origins and diffusion of the crank can be found in the same book, 104-10, 113-16, 118, 119, 167-68; see also "The Expansion of Technology, 500-1500," in The Fontana Economic History of Europe, vol. 1, The Middle Ages, ed. Carlo M. Cipolla (London, 1972), 157, and Medieval Religion and Technology, 17-18, 49, 186. For a more recent assessment of the significance of these various mechanical innovations and their origins, see Reynolds, 23, 26, 28, 29, 70-94, 115, 116. While I do not have the time or space to go into these issues in detail here, it now seems likely that not only the cam but also the trip-hammer and crank were first developed in the late classical period. Discussions of the latest occidental evidence can be found in Michael J. T. Lewis, Millstone and Hammer: The Origins of Water Power (Hull, 1997), and Wikander, "Industrial Applications of Water-Power," 408-10. John Peter Oleson argues that the crank was probably not known to the Romans, although he does not make it clear to what kind of device he is referring when using this term; see "Water-Lifting," in Wikander, Handbook of Ancient Water Technology, 263. It seems likely that something resembling a crank handle was used to turn the device known as the Antikythera mechanism; see Derek J. de Solla Price, Gears from the Greeks: The Antikythera Mechanism-A Calendar Computer from ca. 80 BC (New York, 1965). Joseph Needham notes that the eccentrically placed handles on many rotary querns from the Roman period "constitute a crank"; Science and Civilisation in China, vol. 4, Physics and Physical Technology, pt. 2, Mechanical Engineering (Cambridge, 1965), 186. If we take the purist view of what constitutes a crank, it remains unclear how long before the eighth century the crank handle was commonly used in the West, although it was certainly known in China by the Han dynasty (206 B.C.E. to 220 C.E.); see Needham, 111-18, 374, 378-79. The more sophisticated mechanisms of the crank and connecting rod appear to be early medieval developments; see Lewis, 6, 84, 112, 114.
46. On the origins of the cam and trip-hammer, see White, Medieval Technology and Social Change, 79-83. White's views on the origins and diffusion of the crank can be found in the same book, 104-10, 113-16, 118, 119, 167-68; see also "The Expansion of Technology, 500-1500," in The Fontana Economic History of Europe, vol. 1, The Middle Ages, ed. Carlo M. Cipolla (London, 1972), 157, and Medieval Religion and Technology, 17-18, 49, 186. For a more recent assessment of the significance of these various mechanical innovations and their origins, see Reynolds, 23, 26, 28, 29, 70-94, 115, 116. While I do not have the time or space to go into these issues in detail here, it now seems likely that not only the cam but also the trip-hammer and crank were first developed in the late classical period. Discussions of the latest occidental evidence can be found in Michael J. T. Lewis, Millstone and Hammer: The Origins of Water Power (Hull, 1997), and Wikander, "Industrial Applications of Water-Power," 408-10. John Peter Oleson argues that the crank was probably not known to the Romans, although he does not make it clear to what kind of device he is referring when using this term; see "Water-Lifting," in Wikander, Handbook of Ancient Water Technology, 263. It seems likely that something resembling a crank handle was used to turn the device known as the Antikythera mechanism; see Derek J. de Solla Price, Gears from the Greeks: The Antikythera Mechanism-A Calendar Computer from ca. 80 BC (New York, 1965). Joseph Needham notes that the eccentrically placed handles on many rotary querns from the Roman period "constitute a crank"; Science and Civilisation in China, vol. 4, Physics and Physical Technology, pt. 2, Mechanical Engineering (Cambridge, 1965), 186. If we take the purist view of what constitutes a crank, it remains unclear how long before the eighth century the crank handle was commonly used in the West, although it was certainly known in China by the Han dynasty (206 B.C.E. to 220 C.E.); see Needham, 111-18, 374, 378-79. The more sophisticated mechanisms of the crank and connecting rod appear to be early medieval developments; see Lewis, 6, 84, 112, 114.
47. On the origins of the cam and trip-hammer, see White, Medieval Technology and Social Change, 79-83. White's views on the origins and diffusion of the crank can be found in the same book, 104-10, 113-16, 118, 119, 167-68; see also "The Expansion of Technology, 500-1500," in The Fontana Economic History of Europe, vol. 1, The Middle Ages, ed. Carlo M. Cipolla (London, 1972), 157, and Medieval Religion and Technology, 17-18, 49, 186. For a more recent assessment of the significance of these various mechanical innovations and their origins, see Reynolds, 23, 26, 28, 29, 70-94, 115, 116. While I do not have the time or space to go into these issues in detail here, it now seems likely that not only the cam but also the trip-hammer and crank were first developed in the late classical period. Discussions of the latest occidental evidence can be found in Michael J. T. Lewis, Millstone and Hammer: The Origins of Water Power (Hull, 1997), and Wikander, "Industrial Applications of Water-Power," 408-10. John Peter Oleson argues that the crank was probably not known to the Romans, although he does not make it clear to what kind of device he is referring when using this term; see "Water-Lifting," in Wikander, Handbook of Ancient Water Technology, 263. It seems likely that something resembling a crank handle was used to turn the device known as the Antikythera mechanism; see Derek J. de Solla Price, Gears from the Greeks: The Antikythera Mechanism-A Calendar Computer from ca. 80 BC (New York, 1965). Joseph Needham notes that the eccentrically placed handles on many rotary querns from the Roman period "constitute a crank"; Science and Civilisation in China, vol. 4, Physics and Physical Technology, pt. 2, Mechanical Engineering (Cambridge, 1965), 186. If we take the purist view of what constitutes a crank, it remains unclear how long before the eighth century the crank handle was commonly used in the West, although it was certainly known in China by the Han dynasty (206 B.C.E. to 220 C.E.); see Needham, 111-18, 374, 378-79. The more sophisticated mechanisms of the crank and connecting rod appear to be early medieval developments; see Lewis, 6, 84, 112, 114.
48. On the origins of the cam and trip-hammer, see White, Medieval Technology and Social Change, 79-83. White's views on the origins and diffusion of the crank can be found in the same book, 104-10, 113-16, 118, 119, 167-68; see also "The Expansion of Technology, 500-1500," in The Fontana Economic History of Europe, vol. 1, The Middle Ages, ed. Carlo M. Cipolla (London, 1972), 157, and Medieval Religion and Technology, 17-18, 49, 186. For a more recent assessment of the significance of these various mechanical innovations and their origins, see Reynolds, 23, 26, 28, 29, 70-94, 115, 116. While I do not have the time or space to go into these issues in detail here, it now seems likely that not only the cam but also the trip-hammer and crank were first developed in the late classical period. Discussions of the latest occidental evidence can be found in Michael J. T. Lewis, Millstone and Hammer: The Origins of Water Power (Hull, 1997), and Wikander, "Industrial Applications of Water-Power," 408-10. John Peter Oleson argues that the crank was probably not known to the Romans, although he does not make it clear to what kind of device he is referring when using this term; see "Water-Lifting," in Wikander, Handbook of Ancient Water Technology, 263. It seems likely that something resembling a crank handle was used to turn the device known as the Antikythera mechanism; see Derek J. de Solla Price, Gears from the Greeks: The Antikythera Mechanism-A Calendar Computer from ca. 80 BC (New York, 1965). Joseph Needham notes that the eccentrically placed handles on many rotary querns from the Roman period "constitute a crank"; Science and Civilisation in China, vol. 4, Physics and Physical Technology, pt. 2, Mechanical Engineering (Cambridge, 1965), 186. If we take the purist view of what constitutes a crank, it remains unclear how long before the eighth century the crank handle was commonly used in the West, although it was certainly known in China by the Han dynasty (206 B.C.E. to 220 C.E.); see Needham, 111-18, 374, 378-79. The more sophisticated mechanisms of the crank and connecting rod appear to be early medieval developments; see Lewis, 6, 84, 112, 114.
49. On the origins of the cam and trip-hammer, see White, Medieval Technology and Social Change, 79-83. White's views on the origins and diffusion of the crank can be found in the same book, 104-10, 113-16, 118, 119, 167-68; see also "The Expansion of Technology, 500-1500," in The Fontana Economic History of Europe, vol. 1, The Middle Ages, ed. Carlo M. Cipolla (London, 1972), 157, and Medieval Religion and Technology, 17-18, 49, 186. For a more recent assessment of the significance of these various mechanical innovations and their origins, see Reynolds, 23, 26, 28, 29, 70-94, 115, 116. While I do not have the time or space to go into these issues in detail here, it now seems likely that not only the cam but also the trip-hammer and crank were first developed in the late classical period. Discussions of the latest occidental evidence can be found in Michael J. T. Lewis, Millstone and Hammer: The Origins of Water Power (Hull, 1997), and Wikander, "Industrial Applications of Water-Power," 408-10. John Peter Oleson argues that the crank was probably not known to the Romans, although he does not make it clear to what kind of device he is referring when using this term; see "Water-Lifting," in Wikander, Handbook of Ancient Water Technology, 263. It seems likely that something resembling a crank handle was used to turn the device known as the Antikythera mechanism; see Derek J. de Solla Price, Gears from the Greeks: The Antikythera Mechanism-A Calendar Computer from ca. 80 BC (New York, 1965). Joseph Needham notes that the eccentrically placed handles on many rotary querns from the Roman period "constitute a crank"; Science and Civilisation in China, vol. 4, Physics and Physical Technology, pt. 2, Mechanical Engineering (Cambridge, 1965), 186. If we take the purist view of what constitutes a crank, it remains unclear how long before the eighth century the crank handle was commonly used in the West, although it was certainly known in China by the Han dynasty (206 B.C.E. to 220 C.E.); see Needham, 111-18, 374, 378-79. The more sophisticated mechanisms of the crank and connecting rod appear to be early medieval developments; see Lewis, 6, 84, 112, 114.
50. On the origins of the cam and trip-hammer, see White, Medieval Technology and Social Change, 79-83. White's views on the origins and diffusion of the crank can be found in the same book, 104-10, 113-16, 118, 119, 167-68; see also "The Expansion of Technology, 500-1500," in The Fontana Economic History of Europe, vol. 1, The Middle Ages, ed. Carlo M. Cipolla (London, 1972), 157, and Medieval Religion and Technology, 17-18, 49, 186. For a more recent assessment of the significance of these various mechanical innovations and their origins, see Reynolds, 23, 26, 28, 29, 70-94, 115, 116. While I do not have the time or space to go into these issues in detail here, it now seems likely that not only the cam but also the trip-hammer and crank were first developed in the late classical period. Discussions of the latest occidental evidence can be found in Michael J. T. Lewis, Millstone and Hammer: The Origins of Water Power (Hull, 1997), and Wikander, "Industrial Applications of Water-Power," 408-10. John Peter Oleson argues that the crank was probably not known to the Romans, although he does not make it clear to what kind of device he is referring when using this term; see "Water-Lifting," in Wikander, Handbook of Ancient Water Technology, 263. It seems likely that something resembling a crank handle was used to turn the device known as the Antikythera mechanism; see Derek J. de Solla Price, Gears from the Greeks: The Antikythera Mechanism-A Calendar Computer from ca. 80 BC (New York, 1965). Joseph Needham notes that the eccentrically placed handles on many rotary querns from the Roman period "constitute a crank"; Science and Civilisation in China, vol. 4, Physics and Physical Technology, pt. 2, Mechanical Engineering (Cambridge, 1965), 186. If we take the purist view of what constitutes a crank, it remains unclear how long before the eighth century the crank handle was commonly used in the West, although it was certainly known in China by the Han dynasty (206 B.C.E. to 220 C.E.); see Needham, 111-18, 374, 378-79. The more sophisticated mechanisms of the crank and connecting rod appear to be early medieval developments; see Lewis, 6, 84, 112, 114.
51. On the origins of the cam and trip-hammer, see White, Medieval Technology and Social Change, 79-83. White's views on the origins and diffusion of the crank can be found in the same book, 104-10, 113-16, 118, 119, 167-68; see also "The Expansion of Technology, 500-1500," in The Fontana Economic History of Europe, vol. 1, The Middle Ages, ed. Carlo M. Cipolla (London, 1972), 157, and Medieval Religion and Technology, 17-18, 49, 186. For a more recent assessment of the significance of these various mechanical innovations and their origins, see Reynolds, 23, 26, 28, 29, 70-94, 115, 116. While I do not have the time or space to go into these issues in detail here, it now seems likely that not only the cam but also the trip-hammer and crank were first developed in the late classical period. Discussions of the latest occidental evidence can be found in Michael J. T. Lewis, Millstone and Hammer: The Origins of Water Power (Hull, 1997), and Wikander, "Industrial Applications of Water-Power," 408-10. John Peter Oleson argues that the crank was probably not known to the Romans, although he does not make it clear to what kind of device he is referring when using this term; see "Water-Lifting," in Wikander, Handbook of Ancient Water Technology, 263. It seems likely that something resembling a crank handle was used to turn the device known as the Antikythera mechanism; see Derek J. de Solla Price, Gears from the Greeks: The Antikythera Mechanism-A Calendar Computer from ca. 80 BC (New York, 1965). Joseph Needham notes that the eccentrically placed handles on many rotary querns from the Roman period "constitute a crank"; Science and Civilisation in China, vol. 4, Physics and Physical Technology, pt. 2, Mechanical Engineering (Cambridge, 1965), 186. If we take the purist view of what constitutes a crank, it remains unclear how long before the eighth century the crank handle was commonly used in the West, although it was certainly known in China by the Han dynasty (206 B.C.E. to 220 C.E.); see Needham, 111-18, 374, 378-79. The more sophisticated mechanisms of the crank and connecting rod appear to be early medieval developments; see Lewis, 6, 84, 112, 114.
52. An instructive case in point is the promotional material used for a recent conference on medieval water mills and windmills at which I was invited to speak, which stated that "the mill was central to communities in the Middle Ages as a source of flour, lumber, cloth, and, by the later Middle Ages, iron... the humble windmill and watermill ... exerted a profound influence on the shape of communities, organization of labor, considerations over taxation, and establishment of property rights ... the engineering expertise developed by millwrights led to developments in water management, fine technology, and industrial production, which fed the Industrial Revolution many centuries later."
53. It would seem that Anne-Marie Bautier is the source of this convention, although Bradford Blaine's doctoral dissertation, "The Application of Water Power to Industry during the Middle Ages" (University of California at Los Angeles, 1966), which was supervised by Lynn White Jr., appears to be the first major work of scholarship in English to clearly embrace the distinction. See Anne-Marie Bautier, "Les plus anciennes mentions de moulins hydrauliques industriels et de moulins à vent," Bulletin philologique et historique 2 (1960): 567-626. The fact that around 80 percent of English mills in the early fourteenth century were located in rural areas, at least 90 percent of which were grain mills, provides further support for making such a distinction. On the proportion of medieval English mills located in rural areas, as well as those engaged in industrial activities, see John Langdon, "Lordship and Peasant Consumerism in the Milling Industry of Early Fourteenth-Century England," Past and Present 145 (1994): 13-14, 31.
54. It would seem that Anne-Marie Bautier is the source of this convention, although Bradford Blaine's doctoral dissertation, "The Application of Water Power to Industry during the Middle Ages" (University of California at Los Angeles, 1966), which was supervised by Lynn White Jr., appears to be the first major work of scholarship in English to clearly embrace the distinction. See Anne-Marie Bautier, "Les plus anciennes mentions de moulins hydrauliques industriels et de moulins à vent," Bulletin philologique et historique 2 (1960): 567-626. The fact that around 80 percent of English mills in the early fourteenth century were located in rural areas, at least 90 percent of which were grain mills, provides further support for making such a distinction. On the proportion of medieval English mills located in rural areas, as well as those engaged in industrial activities, see John Langdon, "Lordship and Peasant Consumerism in the Milling Industry of Early Fourteenth-Century England," Past and Present 145 (1994): 13-14, 31.
55. To the best of my knowledge, Richard Holt is the only scholar to have previously subjected the notion of an industrial revolution in the Middle Ages to critical scrutiny. Holt's assessment of the state of industrial milling across Western Europe during the Middle Ages is largely shaped by his extensive knowledge of the English situation. My own findings support his research on medieval England, but indicate that the English situation differed substantially from those in the French, Spanish, and northern Italian kingdoms. See Holt, Mills of Medieval England (n. 6 above), chap. 9; "Medieval Technology and the Historians: The Evidence for the Mill," in Technological Change: Methods and Themes in the History of Technology, ed. Robert Fox (Amsterdam, 1996), 103-21; "Mechanization and the Medieval English Economy," in Smith and Wolfe (n. 4 above), 139-57. For a brief comparative assessment of the English and Continental evidence that is more in line with my own conclusions, see John Langdon, "Was England a Technological Backwater in the Middle Ages?" in Medieval Farming and Technology: The Impact of Agricultural Change in Northwest Europe, ed. G. Astill and J. Langdon (Leiden, 1997), 275-92. Langdon's recently published Mills in the Medieval Economy: England 1300-1540 (Oxford, 2004) provides additional support for our collective assessment of the English evidence.
56. To the best of my knowledge, Richard Holt is the only scholar to have previously subjected the notion of an industrial revolution in the Middle Ages to critical scrutiny. Holt's assessment of the state of industrial milling across Western Europe during the Middle Ages is largely shaped by his extensive knowledge of the English situation. My own findings support his research on medieval England, but indicate that the English situation differed substantially from those in the French, Spanish, and northern Italian kingdoms. See Holt, Mills of Medieval England (n. 6 above), chap. 9; "Medieval Technology and the Historians: The Evidence for the Mill," in Technological Change: Methods and Themes in the History of Technology, ed. Robert Fox (Amsterdam, 1996), 103-21; "Mechanization and the Medieval English Economy," in Smith and Wolfe (n. 4 above), 139-57. For a brief comparative assessment of the English and Continental evidence that is more in line with my own conclusions, see John Langdon, "Was England a Technological Backwater in the Middle Ages?" in Medieval Farming and Technology: The Impact of Agricultural Change in Northwest Europe, ed. G. Astill and J. Langdon (Leiden, 1997), 275-92. Langdon's recently published Mills in the Medieval Economy: England 1300-1540 (Oxford, 2004) provides additional support for our collective assessment of the English evidence.
57. To the best of my knowledge, Richard Holt is the only scholar to have previously subjected the notion of an industrial revolution in the Middle Ages to critical scrutiny. Holt's assessment of the state of industrial milling across Western Europe during the Middle Ages is largely shaped by his extensive knowledge of the English situation. My own findings support his research on medieval England, but indicate that the English situation differed substantially from those in the French, Spanish, and northern Italian kingdoms. See Holt, Mills of Medieval England (n. 6 above), chap. 9; "Medieval Technology and the Historians: The Evidence for the Mill," in Technological Change: Methods and Themes in the History of Technology, ed. Robert Fox (Amsterdam, 1996), 103-21; "Mechanization and the Medieval English Economy," in Smith and Wolfe (n. 4 above), 139-57. For a brief comparative assessment of the English and Continental evidence that is more in line with my own conclusions, see John Langdon, "Was England a Technological Backwater in the Middle Ages?" in Medieval Farming and Technology: The Impact of Agricultural Change in Northwest Europe, ed. G. Astill and J. Langdon (Leiden, 1997), 275-92. Langdon's recently published Mills in the Medieval Economy: England 1300-1540 (Oxford, 2004) provides additional support for our collective assessment of the English evidence.
58. To the best of my knowledge, Richard Holt is the only scholar to have previously subjected the notion of an industrial revolution in the Middle Ages to critical scrutiny. Holt's assessment of the state of industrial milling across Western Europe during the Middle Ages is largely shaped by his extensive knowledge of the English situation. My own findings support his research on medieval England, but indicate that the English situation differed substantially from those in the French, Spanish, and northern Italian kingdoms. See Holt, Mills of Medieval England (n. 6 above), chap. 9; "Medieval Technology and the Historians: The Evidence for the Mill," in Technological Change: Methods and Themes in the History of Technology, ed. Robert Fox (Amsterdam, 1996), 103-21; "Mechanization and the Medieval English Economy," in Smith and Wolfe (n. 4 above), 139-57. For a brief comparative assessment of the English and Continental evidence that is more in line with my own conclusions, see John Langdon, "Was England a Technological Backwater in the Middle Ages?" in Medieval Farming and Technology: The Impact of Agricultural Change in Northwest Europe, ed. G. Astill and J. Langdon (Leiden, 1997), 275-92. Langdon's recently published Mills in the Medieval Economy: England 1300-1540 (Oxford, 2004) provides additional support for our collective assessment of the English evidence.
59. See Örjan Wikander, "The Watermill," in Wikander, Handbook of Ancient Water Technology (n. 4 above), 371-400; Lewis. Wikander has conducted extensive and detailed work on Roman-era water mills for well over two decades. For some of the earlier work by classical historians who argued for either technological stagnation or the limited use of waterpower in the Roman era, see Moses I. Finley, "Technical Innovation and Economic Progress in the Ancient World," Economic History Review 18 (1965): 29-45; H. W. Pleket, "Technology and Society in the Graeco-Roman World," Acta Historiae Neer-landica 2 (1967): 1-25, and "Technology in the Greco-Roman World: A General Report," Tallanta 5 (1973):6-47.
60. See Örjan Wikander, "The Watermill," in Wikander, Handbook of Ancient Water Technology (n. 4 above), 371-400; Lewis. Wikander has conducted extensive and detailed work on Roman-era water mills for well over two decades. For some of the earlier work by classical historians who argued for either technological stagnation or the limited use of waterpower in the Roman era, see Moses I. Finley, "Technical Innovation and Economic Progress in the Ancient World," Economic History Review 18 (1965): 29-45; H. W. Pleket, "Technology and Society in the Graeco-Roman World," Acta Historiae Neer-landica 2 (1967): 1-25, and "Technology in the Greco-Roman World: A General Report," Tallanta 5 (1973):6-47.
61. See Örjan Wikander, "The Watermill," in Wikander, Handbook of Ancient Water Technology (n. 4 above), 371-400; Lewis. Wikander has conducted extensive and detailed work on Roman-era water mills for well over two decades. For some of the earlier work by classical historians who argued for either technological stagnation or the limited use of waterpower in the Roman era, see Moses I. Finley, "Technical Innovation and Economic Progress in the Ancient World," Economic History Review 18 (1965): 29-45; H. W. Pleket, "Technology and Society in the Graeco-Roman World," Acta Historiae Neer-landica 2 (1967): 1-25, and "Technology in the Greco-Roman World: A General Report," Tallanta 5 (1973):6-47.
62. See Örjan Wikander, "The Watermill," in Wikander, Handbook of Ancient Water Technology (n. 4 above), 371-400; Lewis. Wikander has conducted extensive and detailed work on Roman-era water mills for well over two decades. For some of the earlier work by classical historians who argued for either technological stagnation or the limited use of waterpower in the Roman era, see Moses I. Finley, "Technical Innovation and Economic Progress in the Ancient World," Economic History Review 18 (1965): 29-45; H. W. Pleket, "Technology and Society in the Graeco-Roman World," Acta Historiae Neer-landica 2 (1967): 1-25, and "Technology in the Greco-Roman World: A General Report," Tallanta 5 (1973):6-47.
63. Wikander, "The Watermill" and "Industrial Applications of Water-Power" (n. 4 above). Wikander's findings on the relative chronologies of the vertical- and horizontal-wheeled water mills problematize much of the previous literature on the subject.
64. Ausonius, Mosella, 2 vols., trans. Hugh G. Evelyn White (London, 1919-21), 362-64. For recent scholarship on the subject, see K.-H. Ludwig, "Die technikgeschichtlichen Zweifel an der 'Mosella' des Ausonius sind unbegründet," Technikgeschichte 48 (1981): 131-34; D. L. Simms, "Water-Driven Saws, Ausonius, and the Authenticity of the Mosella," Technology and Culture 24 (1983): 635-43, and "Water-Driven Saws in Late Antiquity," Technology and Culture 26 (1985): 275-76; Wikander, "Industrial Applications of Water-Power," 404-5. White's position that the passage is of dubious veracity (Medieval Technology and Social Change [n. 5 above], 82-83) is no longer credible.
65. Ausonius, Mosella, 2 vols., trans. Hugh G. Evelyn White (London, 1919-21), 362-64. For recent scholarship on the subject, see K.-H. Ludwig, "Die technikgeschichtlichen Zweifel an der 'Mosella' des Ausonius sind unbegründet," Technikgeschichte 48 (1981): 131-34; D. L. Simms, "Water-Driven Saws, Ausonius, and the Authenticity of the Mosella," Technology and Culture 24 (1983): 635-43, and "Water-Driven Saws in Late Antiquity," Technology and Culture 26 (1985): 275-76; Wikander, "Industrial Applications of Water-Power," 404-5. White's position that the passage is of dubious veracity (Medieval Technology and Social Change [n. 5 above], 82-83) is no longer credible.
66. Ausonius, Mosella, 2 vols., trans. Hugh G. Evelyn White (London, 1919-21), 362-64. For recent scholarship on the subject, see K.-H. Ludwig, "Die technikgeschichtlichen Zweifel an der 'Mosella' des Ausonius sind unbegründet," Technikgeschichte 48 (1981): 131-34; D. L. Simms, "Water-Driven Saws, Ausonius, and the Authenticity of the Mosella," Technology and Culture 24 (1983): 635-43, and "Water-Driven Saws in Late Antiquity," Technology and Culture 26 (1985): 275-76; Wikander, "Industrial Applications of Water-Power," 404-5. White's position that the passage is of dubious veracity (Medieval Technology and Social Change [n. 5 above], 82-83) is no longer credible.
67. Ausonius, Mosella, 2 vols., trans. Hugh G. Evelyn White (London, 1919-21), 362-64. For recent scholarship on the subject, see K.-H. Ludwig, "Die technikgeschichtlichen Zweifel an der 'Mosella' des Ausonius sind unbegründet," Technikgeschichte 48 (1981): 131-34; D. L. Simms, "Water-Driven Saws, Ausonius, and the Authenticity of the Mosella," Technology and Culture 24 (1983): 635-43, and "Water-Driven Saws in Late Antiquity," Technology and Culture 26 (1985): 275-76; Wikander, "Industrial Applications of Water-Power," 404-5. White's position that the passage is of dubious veracity (Medieval Technology and Social Change [n. 5 above], 82-83) is no longer credible.
68. Ausonius, Mosella, 2 vols., trans. Hugh G. Evelyn White (London, 1919-21), 362-64. For recent scholarship on the subject, see K.-H. Ludwig, "Die technikgeschichtlichen Zweifel an der 'Mosella' des Ausonius sind unbegründet," Technikgeschichte 48 (1981): 131-34; D. L. Simms, "Water-Driven Saws, Ausonius, and the Authenticity of the Mosella," Technology and Culture 24 (1983): 635-43, and "Water-Driven Saws in Late Antiquity," Technology and Culture 26 (1985): 275-76; Wikander, "Industrial Applications of Water-Power," 404-5. White's position that the passage is of dubious veracity (Medieval Technology and Social Change [n. 5 above], 82-83) is no longer credible.
69. Wikander, "Industrial Applications of Water-Power," 405-6.
70. The case for Roman-era fulling mills is put in Lewis (n. 9 above), 89-100; for Roman grain-pounders and ore stamps, in Lewis, 101-10. The term "trip-hammer" is used in the literature as shorthand for cam-operated recumbent or vertical stamps. See Terry S. Reynolds, "Medieval Roots of the Industrial Revolution," Scientific American, July 1984, 109-16, 111-12, and Lewis, 6-7, for clear explanations of the two types of trip-hammer.
71. Walter Horn, "Water Power and the Plan of St. Gall," Journal of Medieval History 1 (1975): 219-58.
72. See Örjan Wikander, Exploitation of Water-Power or Technological Stagnation? A Reappraisal of the Productive Forces in the Roman Empire (Lund, 1984), 38; Kevin Greene, "Perspectives on Roman Technology," Oxford Journal of Archaeology 9 (1990): 209-19. Greene's "Technological Innovation and Economic Progress in the Ancient World: M. I. Finley Re-Considered," Economic History Review 53 (2000): 29-59, is an excellent reassessment of the work on this subject.
73. See Örjan Wikander, Exploitation of Water-Power or Technological Stagnation? A Reappraisal of the Productive Forces in the Roman Empire (Lund, 1984), 38; Kevin Greene, "Perspectives on Roman Technology," Oxford Journal of Archaeology 9 (1990): 209-19. Greene's "Technological Innovation and Economic Progress in the Ancient World: M. I. Finley Re-Considered," Economic History Review 53 (2000): 29-59, is an excellent reassessment of the work on this subject.
74. See Örjan Wikander, Exploitation of Water-Power or Technological Stagnation? A Reappraisal of the Productive Forces in the Roman Empire (Lund, 1984), 38; Kevin Greene, "Perspectives on Roman Technology," Oxford Journal of Archaeology 9 (1990): 209-19. Greene's "Technological Innovation and Economic Progress in the Ancient World: M. I. Finley Re-Considered," Economic History Review 53 (2000): 29-59, is an excellent reassessment of the work on this subject.
75. See Zhao Jizhu, "Agricultural Machines," in Ancient China's Technology and Science (Beijing, 1983), 425-26; Needham (n. 9 above), 370-72, 392. Needham's remains the most thorough study in English of the Chinese material on early waterpowered and wind-powered machinery.
76. Jizhu, 426-27; Needham, 369-80, 390-412. Reynolds's brief overview of medieval developments in the Chinese use of waterpower and powered mills for industry is heavily indebted to Needham; see Reynolds, Stronger than a Hundred Men (n. 5 above), 115-17. However, his claim that "Chinese applications of water power... [do] not compare to the European accomplishment, particularly in the period from the eleventh to sixteenth centuries" is not supported by the evidence compiled by Needham, although it is well known that the Mongol invasion of China in the thirteenth century retarded Chinese technological development for a few centuries. Furthermore, Reynolds's claim that water levers could have operated the waterpowered bellows and pestles reported by Needham from the first century B.C.E. onward has been questioned by the Irish archaeologist Colin Rynne, who has pointed out that water levers cannot move at the speed required to operate bellows (personal communication, May 2002). To the best of my knowledge, there has been no recent detailed work conducted on waterpower in ancient China.
77. Jizhu, 426-27; Needham, 369-80, 390-412. Reynolds's brief overview of medieval developments in the Chinese use of waterpower and powered mills for industry is heavily indebted to Needham; see Reynolds, Stronger than a Hundred Men (n. 5 above), 115-17. However, his claim that "Chinese applications of water power... [do] not compare to the European accomplishment, particularly in the period from the eleventh to sixteenth centuries" is not supported by the evidence compiled by Needham, although it is well known that the Mongol invasion of China in the thirteenth century retarded Chinese technological development for a few centuries. Furthermore, Reynolds's claim that water levers could have operated the waterpowered bellows and pestles reported by Needham from the first century B.C.E. onward has been questioned by the Irish archaeologist Colin Rynne, who has pointed out that water levers cannot move at the speed required to operate bellows (personal communication, May 2002). To the best of my knowledge, there has been no recent detailed work conducted on waterpower in ancient China.
78. Jizhu, 426-27; Needham, 369-80, 390-412. Reynolds's brief overview of medieval developments in the Chinese use of waterpower and powered mills for industry is heavily indebted to Needham; see Reynolds, Stronger than a Hundred Men (n. 5 above), 115-17. However, his claim that "Chinese applications of water power... [do] not compare to the European accomplishment, particularly in the period from the eleventh to sixteenth centuries" is not supported by the evidence compiled by Needham, although it is well known that the Mongol invasion of China in the thirteenth century retarded Chinese technological development for a few centuries. Furthermore, Reynolds's claim that water levers could have operated the waterpowered bellows and pestles reported by Needham from the first century B.C.E. onward has been questioned by the Irish archaeologist Colin Rynne, who has pointed out that water levers cannot move at the speed required to operate bellows (personal communication, May 2002). To the best of my knowledge, there has been no recent detailed work conducted on waterpower in ancient China.
79. Needham, 401.
80. For a brief overview of some of the literature on industrial mills in medieval Islamic countries, see Donald R. Hill, A History of Engineering in Classical and Medieval Times (London, 1984), 169-72. For Islamic and Christian Spain, see Thomas F. Glick, Islamic and Christian Spain in the Early Middle Ages (Princeton, N.J., 1979), 230-35. See also Thomas F. Glick and Helena Kirchner, "Hydraulic Systems and Technologies of Islamic Spain: History and Archaeology," in Working with Water in Medieval Europe: Technology and Resource-Use, ed. Paolo Squatriti (Leiden, 2000), 267-330, for a detailed discussion of the development of grain milling in Islamic Spain. According to Glick, the early Islamic manuscript sources are very limited (personal communication, April 2004).
81. For a brief overview of some of the literature on industrial mills in medieval Islamic countries, see Donald R. Hill, A History of Engineering in Classical and Medieval Times (London, 1984), 169-72. For Islamic and Christian Spain, see Thomas F. Glick, Islamic and Christian Spain in the Early Middle Ages (Princeton, N.J., 1979), 230-35. See also Thomas F. Glick and Helena Kirchner, "Hydraulic Systems and Technologies of Islamic Spain: History and Archaeology," in Working with Water in Medieval Europe: Technology and Resource-Use, ed. Paolo Squatriti (Leiden, 2000), 267-330, for a detailed discussion of the development of grain milling in Islamic Spain. According to Glick, the early Islamic manuscript sources are very limited (personal communication, April 2004).
82. For a brief overview of some of the literature on industrial mills in medieval Islamic countries, see Donald R. Hill, A History of Engineering in Classical and Medieval Times (London, 1984), 169-72. For Islamic and Christian Spain, see Thomas F. Glick, Islamic and Christian Spain in the Early Middle Ages (Princeton, N.J., 1979), 230-35. See also Thomas F. Glick and Helena Kirchner, "Hydraulic Systems and Technologies of Islamic Spain: History and Archaeology," in Working with Water in Medieval Europe: Technology and Resource-Use, ed. Paolo Squatriti (Leiden, 2000), 267-330, for a detailed discussion of the development of grain milling in Islamic Spain. According to Glick, the early Islamic manuscript sources are very limited (personal communication, April 2004).
83. Ahmad Y. al-Hassan and Donald R. Hill, Islamic Technology: An Illustrated History (Cambridge, 1986), 53.
84. Örjan Wikander, "Archaeological Evidence for Early Water Mills-An Interim Report," History of Technology 10 (1985): 162-63, and "The Watermill" (n. 13 above), 376-77, in which he states that none of the Iranian and Iraqi examples can be firmly dated to before the Arab conquest.
85. Örjan Wikander, "Archaeological Evidence for Early Water Mills-An Interim Report," History of Technology 10 (1985): 162-63, and "The Watermill" (n. 13 above), 376-77, in which he states that none of the Iranian and Iraqi examples can be firmly dated to before the Arab conquest.
86. Al-Hassan and Hill, 53. See Reynolds, Stronger than a Hundred Men, 117, for a detailed set of references indicating the widespread dissemination of medieval Islamic water mills.
87. Al-Hassan and Hill, 53. See Reynolds, Stronger than a Hundred Men, 117, for a detailed set of references indicating the widespread dissemination of medieval Islamic water mills.
88. See Arnold Pacey, Technology in World Civilization: A Thousand-Year History (Cambridge, Mass., 1990), 10-11; al-Hassan and Hill, 54;
89. See Arnold Pacey, Technology in World Civilization: A Thousand-Year History (Cambridge, Mass., 1990), 10-11; al-Hassan and Hill, 54;
90. Donald R. Hill, Studies in Medieval Islamic Technology: From Philo to al-Jazari, from Alexandria to Diyar Bakr (Aldershot, Hants., 1998), XVIII-10.
91. Hill, Studies in Medieval Islamic Technology, XVIII-10. Hill did not cite the documentary evidence for these claims.
92. Glick, Islamic and Christian Spain, 231-34; Reynolds, Stronger than a Hundred Men (n. 5 above), 117-18.
93. Glick, Islamic and Christian Spain, 231-34; Reynolds, Stronger than a Hundred Men (n. 5 above), 117-18.
94. Hill, A History of Engineering (n. 23 above), 172; Lewis (n. 9 above). 116-21.
95. Hill, A History of Engineering (n. 23 above), 172; Lewis (n. 9 above). 116-21.
96. 1 have followed the convention that the medieval period began circa 500 c.E. and ended in 1500, but for the purposes of capturing the data cited by most of the scholars who have written on the subject have extended the samples to 1600.
97. The distribution of the mills: France (186), England (145), Germany (28), Italy (15), other European countries (15).
98. These historians are Eleanora Carus-Wilson and Reginald Lennard, who identified 140 English fulling mills between them (as well as a single tanning mill), and Anne-Marie Bautier, who identified 147 French industrial mills, around half of which (77) were fulling mills.
99. Specifically, 140 of 145 mills in England, 79 of 186 in France.
100. The source table for this data is reproduced in appendix A to Adam Lucas, Wind, Water, Work: Ancient and Medieval Milling Technology (Leiden, forthcoming), The data are arranged according to the type or function of the mill in question - fulling cloth, grinding bark, pulping paper, and so on. Each entry includes the date or period to which the reference is supposed to refer, its location, the author who cited the example, and the primary source for the information provided, if available. Only those examples that are verifiable with respect to manuscript or archaeological sources have been treated as unproblematic and used as the basis for the analysis here. Where more than ten examples of a single type of mill have been described by a single author, the references provided have generally been grouped and the article concerned cited for the sources.
101. See Holt, Mills of Medieval England (n. 6 above), 147-48, for a brief explanation of why such an appellation is misleading.
102. Langdon, Mills in the Medieval Economy (n. 12 above), 40.
103. The latest type of industrial mill appears at the bottom of table 3 (the water-powered blast furnace), while the earliest appears at the top (the malt mill).
104. Of these countries, Spain and Germany have received some attention. See, for example, Glick, Islamic and Christian Spain (n. 23 above), and Reynolds, Stronger than a Hundred Men (n. 5 above), on medieval Spain. Walter Kuhn did some significant work on medieval German industrial mills in the 1960s, but I have not yet had an opportunity to study it.
105. Of these countries, Spain and Germany have received some attention. See, for example, Glick, Islamic and Christian Spain (n. 23 above), and Reynolds, Stronger than a Hundred Men (n. 5 above), on medieval Spain. Walter Kuhn did some significant work on medieval German industrial mills in the 1960s, but I have not yet had an opportunity to study it.
106. These are, respectively, Eleanora Carus-Wilson, Reginald Lennard, R. A. Donkin, Ian Jack, Richard Holt, John Langdon, and myself on England and Wales, Anne-Marie Bautier on France, and John Muendel on Italy.
107. Domesday Book, the Hundred Rolls, and Inquisitiones Post Mortem record the location of the mill, to whom it belonged, and often to whom it was leased and on what terms, as well as its annual revenue, what type of mill it was, and the year in which the record was made. Although they may not include technical details about mills, these can be gleaned from the manorial account rolls that have survived from the thirteenth century onward. In my own exhaustive examination of more than fifty ecclesiastical cartularies, account books, and surveys, I found only thirty English industrial mills that had not been noted by earlier scholars, the vast majority of which were fulling mills.
108. See, for example, Holt's comments on the reliability of the Domesday mill records in Mills of Medieval England (n. 6 above), 5-16 and 107-8, and on the Hundred Rolls, 24-25 and 54. See E. A. Kosminsky's comments on the Hundred Rolls in Studies in the Agrarian History of England in the Thirteenth Century, trans. Ruth Kisch (Oxford, 1956), 40-41. On the comparability of the mill records in Domesday and the Hundred Rolls, see Holt, Mills of Medieval England, 108-12 . See Langdon, "Lordship and Peasant Consumerism" (n. 11 above), 7-9, on the reliability of the Inquisitiones Post Mortem.
109. See, for example, Holt's comments on the reliability of the Domesday mill records in Mills of Medieval England (n. 6 above), 5-16 and 107-8, and on the Hundred Rolls, 24-25 and 54. See E. A. Kosminsky's comments on the Hundred Rolls in Studies in the Agrarian History of England in the Thirteenth Century, trans. Ruth Kisch (Oxford, 1956), 40-41. On the comparability of the mill records in Domesday and the Hundred Rolls, see Holt, Mills of Medieval England, 108-12 . See Langdon, "Lordship and Peasant Consumerism" (n. 11 above), 7-9, on the reliability of the Inquisitiones Post Mortem.
110. See, for example, Holt's comments on the reliability of the Domesday mill records in Mills of Medieval England (n. 6 above), 5-16 and 107-8, and on the Hundred Rolls, 24-25 and 54. See E. A. Kosminsky's comments on the Hundred Rolls in Studies in the Agrarian History of England in the Thirteenth Century, trans. Ruth Kisch (Oxford, 1956), 40-41. On the comparability of the mill records in Domesday and the Hundred Rolls, see Holt, Mills of Medieval England, 108-12 . See Langdon, "Lordship and Peasant Consumerism" (n. 11 above), 7-9, on the reliability of the Inquisitiones Post Mortem.
111. See, for example, Holt's comments on the reliability of the Domesday mill records in Mills of Medieval England (n. 6 above), 5-16 and 107-8, and on the Hundred Rolls, 24-25 and 54. See E. A. Kosminsky's comments on the Hundred Rolls in Studies in the Agrarian History of England in the Thirteenth Century, trans. Ruth Kisch (Oxford, 1956), 40-41. On the comparability of the mill records in Domesday and the Hundred Rolls, see Holt, Mills of Medieval England, 108-12 . See Langdon, "Lordship and Peasant Consumerism" (n. 11 above), 7-9, on the reliability of the Inquisitiones Post Mortem.
112. Paul Benoit and Joséphine Rouillard, "Medieval Hydraulics in France," in Squatriti (n. 23 above), 193, cite P. Malanima, I piedi di legno: Una macchina alle origini dell'industria medievale (Milan, 1988), as evidence that "[t]he fulling mill appeared for the first time [in Europe?] in Italy, in the founding charter of 962 of a Benedictine monastery in the Abruzzi." I have yet to verify the primary source for this claim, however. Apart from the example of an early forge mill, Benoit's and Rouillard's chronology of other industrial milling developments in France is basically consistent with the work of Bautier (n. 11 above), from which most of the French material cited in this article is drawn.
113. Paul Benoit and Joséphine Rouillard, "Medieval Hydraulics in France," in Squatriti (n. 23 above), 193, cite P. Malanima, I piedi di legno: Una macchina alle origini dell'industria medievale (Milan, 1988), as evidence that "[t]he fulling mill appeared for the first time [in Europe?] in Italy, in the founding charter of 962 of a Benedictine monastery in the Abruzzi." I have yet to verify the primary source for this claim, however. Apart from the example of an early forge mill, Benoit's and Rouillard's chronology of other industrial milling developments in France is basically consistent with the work of Bautier (n. 11 above), from which most of the French material cited in this article is drawn.
114. Benoit and Rouillard, 195, draw attention to a description from 1135 by Arnauld de Bonneval of the Cistercian abbey of Clairvaux, who states that "water activated a forge in the heart of the abbey, amidst other milling installations." I have not had an opportunity to check this source, but if it is correct it pushes back the earliest date for the forge mill in France by sixty-eight years.
115. With respect to sawmills, this involves excluding the late Roman and Byzantine examples cited. Benoit and Rouillard, 194, claim, without documentation, that the earliest medieval reference to this technique is from a Norman document of 1204. If this is correct, this would also dearly establish France as a leader in the application of water-power to sawmilling. Interestingly, those two waterpowered technologies with precursors in the Roman Empire and/or ancient China, that is, the sawmill and the forge mill, do not appear in the European documentation until relatively late. The reasons for this remain unclear, however.
116. In 1443 in the first instance and 1551 in the second.
117. The French examples are dated 1384, 1402, and 1412; the earliest examples from elsewhere being 1429 in Italy and 1496 from England.
118. What Robert Forbes called a "copper mill" was either an ore-crushing mill, a copper-smelting mill, or a copper-polishing mill. It must, therefore, have been an adaptation to copper mining of an existing device or devices. Neither Forbes nor any of the other authors from whom this material is drawn have provided verifiable sources for medieval copper mills, silver mills, water-driven mining hoists, wire mills, or winding mills.
119. Langdon, "Lordship and Peasant Consumerism" (n. 11 above), 12-14. Langdon's estimate is based on a systematic study of mill rentals on more than twelve hundred English manorial estates. Other regional studies of industrial mills in medieval England whose data were not included in this study are Scott E. Kilburn, "Early Cloth Fulling and Its Machinery," Transactions of the Newcomen Society 12 (1931-32): 31-52; Rodney F. Butler, The History of Kirkstall Forge: 1200-1945 A.D. (Kirkstall, 1945); Ian S. Beckwith, "Londonthorpe Mill," Industrial Archaeology 8 (1971): 25-28; Owen Bedwin, "The Excavation of Ardingley Fulling Mill and Forge, 1975-76," Post-Medieval Archaeology 10 (1976): 34-64; J. G. Rollins, "Forge Mills, Redditch, Worcestershire: From Abbey Metal-works to Museum of the Needlemaking Industry," Industrial Archaelogy 16 (1981): 158-69; C. J. M. Beamish, "The Fulling Mill - One of the Oldest Mechanised Industries in Britain," Industrial Archaeology 18 (1983): 78-82.
120. Langdon, "Lordship and Peasant Consumerism" (n. 11 above), 12-14. Langdon's estimate is based on a systematic study of mill rentals on more than twelve hundred English manorial estates. Other regional studies of industrial mills in medieval England whose data were not included in this study are Scott E. Kilburn, "Early Cloth Fulling and Its Machinery," Transactions of the Newcomen Society 12 (1931-32): 31-52; Rodney F. Butler, The History of Kirkstall Forge: 1200-1945 A.D. (Kirkstall, 1945); Ian S. Beckwith, "Londonthorpe Mill," Industrial Archaeology 8 (1971): 25-28; Owen Bedwin, "The Excavation of Ardingley Fulling Mill and Forge, 1975-76," Post-Medieval Archaeology 10 (1976): 34-64; J. G. Rollins, "Forge Mills, Redditch, Worcestershire: From Abbey Metal-works to Museum of the Needlemaking Industry," Industrial Archaelogy 16 (1981): 158-69; C. J. M. Beamish, "The Fulling Mill - One of the Oldest Mechanised Industries in Britain," Industrial Archaeology 18 (1983): 78-82.
121. Langdon, "Lordship and Peasant Consumerism" (n. 11 above), 12-14. Langdon's estimate is based on a systematic study of mill rentals on more than twelve hundred English manorial estates. Other regional studies of industrial mills in medieval England whose data were not included in this study are Scott E. Kilburn, "Early Cloth Fulling and Its Machinery," Transactions of the Newcomen Society 12 (1931-32): 31-52; Rodney F. Butler, The History of Kirkstall Forge: 1200-1945 A.D. (Kirkstall, 1945); Ian S. Beckwith, "Londonthorpe Mill," Industrial Archaeology 8 (1971): 25-28; Owen Bedwin, "The Excavation of Ardingley Fulling Mill and Forge, 1975-76,"
122. Langdon, "Lordship and Peasant Consumerism" (n. 11 above), 12-14. Langdon's estimate is based on a systematic study of mill rentals on more than twelve hundred English manorial estates. Other regional studies of industrial mills in medieval England whose data were not included in this study are Scott E. Kilburn, "Early Cloth Fulling and Its Machinery," Transactions of the Newcomen Society 12 (1931-32): 31-52; Rodney F. Butler, The History of Kirkstall Forge: 1200-1945 A.D. (Kirkstall, 1945); Ian S. Beckwith, "Londonthorpe Mill," Industrial Archaeology 8 (1971): 25-28; Owen Bedwin, "The Excavation of Ardingley Fulling Mill and Forge, 1975-76," Post-Medieval Archaeology 10 (1976): 34-64; J. G. Rollins, "Forge Mills, Redditch, Worcestershire: From Abbey Metal-works to Museum of the Needlemaking Industry," Industrial Archaelogy 16 (1981): 158-69; C. J. M. Beamish, "The Fulling Mill - One of the Oldest Mechanised Industries in Britain," Industrial Archaeology 18 (1983): 78-82.
123. Langdon, "Lordship and Peasant Consumerism" (n. 11 above), 12-14. Langdon's estimate is based on a systematic study of mill rentals on more than twelve hundred English manorial estates. Other regional studies of industrial mills in medieval England whose data were not included in this study are Scott E. Kilburn, "Early Cloth Fulling and Its Machinery," Transactions of the Newcomen Society 12 (1931-32): 31-52; Rodney F. Butler, The History of Kirkstall Forge: 1200-1945 A.D. (Kirkstall, 1945); Ian S. Beckwith, "Londonthorpe Mill," Industrial Archaeology 8 (1971): 25-28; Owen Bedwin, "The Excavation of Ardingley Fulling Mill and Forge, 1975-76," Post-Medieval Archaeology 10 (1976): 34-64; J. G. Rollins, "Forge Mills, Redditch, Worcestershire: From Abbey Metal-works to Museum of the Needlemaking Industry," Industrial Archaelogy 16 (1981): 158-69; C. J. M. Beamish, "The Fulling Mill - One of the Oldest Mechanised Industries in Britain," Industrial Archaeology 18 (1983): 78-82.
124. Langdon, "Lordship and Peasant Consumerism" (n. 11 above), 12-14. Langdon's estimate is based on a systematic study of mill rentals on more than twelve hundred English manorial estates. Other regional studies of industrial mills in medieval England whose data were not included in this study are Scott E. Kilburn, "Early Cloth Fulling and Its Machinery," Transactions of the Newcomen Society 12 (1931-32): 31-52; Rodney F. Butler, The History of Kirkstall Forge: 1200-1945 A.D. (Kirkstall, 1945); Ian S. Beckwith, "Londonthorpe Mill," Industrial Archaeology 8 (1971): 25-28; Owen Bedwin, "The Excavation of Ardingley Fulling Mill and Forge, 1975-76," Post-Medieval Archaeology 10 (1976): 34-64; J. G. Rollins, "Forge Mills, Redditch, Worcestershire: From Abbey Metal-works to Museum of the Needlemaking Industry," Industrial Archaelogy 16 (1981): 158-69; C. J. M. Beamish, "The Fulling Mill - One of the Oldest Mechanised Industries in Britain," Industrial Archaeology 18 (1983): 78-82.
125. Langdon, "Lordship and Peasant Consumerism" (n. 11 above), 12-14. Langdon's estimate is based on a systematic study of mill rentals on more than twelve hundred English manorial estates. Other regional studies of industrial mills in medieval England whose data were not included in this study are Scott E. Kilburn, "Early Cloth Fulling and Its Machinery," Transactions of the Newcomen Society 12 (1931-32): 31-52; Rodney F. Butler, The History of Kirkstall Forge: 1200-1945 A.D. (Kirkstall, 1945); Ian S. Beckwith, "Londonthorpe Mill," Industrial Archaeology 8 (1971): 25-28; Owen Bedwin, "The Excavation of Ardingley Fulling Mill and Forge, 1975-76," Post-Medieval Archaeology 10 (1976): 34-64; J. G. Rollins, "Forge Mills, Redditch, Worcestershire: From Abbey Metal-works to Museum of the Needlemaking Industry," Industrial Archaelogy 16 (1981): 158-69; C. J. M. Beamish, "The Fulling Mill - One of the Oldest Mechanised Industries in Britain," Industrial Archaeology 18 (1983): 78-82.
126. Langdon, "Lordship and Peasant Consumerism," 14, n. 27, citing J. Langdon, "Water-Mills and Windmills in the West Midlands, 1086-1500," Economic History Review 44 (1991): 434, table 2. Langdon found that it is only after the first major plague outbreak that the numbers of industrial mills in England began to increase, particularly in the period between 1450 and 1475. Even then, however, the increase was only marginal.
127. Langdon, "Lordship and Peasant Consumerism," 14, n. 27, citing J. Langdon, "Water-Mills and Windmills in the West Midlands, 1086-1500," Economic History Review 44 (1991): 434, table 2. Langdon found that it is only after the first major plague outbreak that the numbers of industrial mills in England began to increase, particularly in the period between 1450 and 1475. Even then, however, the increase was only marginal.
128. Langdon, "Water-Mills and Windmills in the West Midlands," 436.
129. The houses were Battle, Bee, Canterbury, Durham, Hereford, and Lancaster; see Adam Lucas, "Machinariarum Nihil Ex Deo: The Role of the Church in the Development of Powered Milling in Medieval England" (Ph.D. diss., University of New South Wales, 2003), chap. 3. This was not necessarily typical of English Benedictine houses, however. Holt found that whereas Glastonbury in the south had interests in three fulling mills out of the forty mills that it held by the early fourteenth century, or 7.5 percent of the total, the East Anglian houses of Bury, Peterborough, and Ramsey had only two fulling mills between them (Bury had none), out of well over 150 mills they held in total; see Mills of Medieval England (n. 6 above), 156-57. The 10 percent figure arrived at through my own analysis is therefore not necessarily representative of the numbers of industrial mills held by the Benedictines as a whole.
130. The houses were Battle, Bee, Canterbury, Durham, Hereford, and Lancaster; see Adam Lucas, "Machinariarum Nihil Ex Deo: The Role of the Church in the Development of Powered Milling in Medieval England" (Ph.D. diss., University of New South Wales, 2003), chap. 3. This was not necessarily typical of English Benedictine houses, however. Holt found that whereas Glastonbury in the south had interests in three fulling mills out of the forty mills that it held by the early fourteenth century, or 7.5 percent of the total, the East Anglian houses of Bury, Peterborough, and Ramsey had only two fulling mills between them (Bury had none), out of well over 150 mills they held in total; see Mills of Medieval England (n. 6 above), 156-57. The 10 percent figure arrived at through my own analysis is therefore not necessarily representative of the numbers of industrial mills held by the Benedictines as a whole.
131. The houses were Beaulieu, Furness, Old Warden, Sibton, and Kirkstall; see Lucas, "Machinariarum Nihil Ex Deo," chap. 5. However, three of the five recorded no industrial mills, even though one of these, Furness Abbey, was heavily involved in iron and lead mining. While there is archaeological evidence from Kirkstall and Bordesley Abbeys that industrial mills were not always recorded in manorial accounts and charters, an extensive survey I undertook of the English archaeological literature from 1950 to 2000 suggests that such underrecording was not very significant.
132. See, for example, White, Medieval Religion and Technology (n. 5 above), 67; Reynolds, Stronger than a Hundred Men (n. 5 above), 110-12, and "Medieval Roots of the Industrial Revolution" (n. 17 above), 109; Basalla (n. 5 above), 148 ; Major (n. 5 above), 232. 55.
133. See, for example, White, Medieval Religion and Technology (n. 5 above), 67; Reynolds, Stronger than a Hundred Men (n. 5 above), 110-12, and "Medieval Roots of the Industrial Revolution" (n. 17 above), 109; Basalla (n. 5 above), 148 ; Major (n. 5 above), 232. 55.
134. See, for example, White, Medieval Religion and Technology (n. 5 above), 67; Reynolds, Stronger than a Hundred Men (n. 5 above), 110-12, and "Medieval Roots of the Industrial Revolution" (n. 17 above), 109; Basalla (n. 5 above), 148 ; Major (n. 5 above), 232. 55.
135. See, for example, White, Medieval Religion and Technology (n. 5 above), 67; Reynolds, Stronger than a Hundred Men (n. 5 above), 110-12, and "Medieval Roots of the Industrial Revolution" (n. 17 above), 109; Basalla (n. 5 above), 148 ; Major (n. 5 above), 232. 55.
136. See, for example, White, Medieval Religion and Technology (n. 5 above), 67; Reynolds, Stronger than a Hundred Men (n. 5 above), 110-12, and "Medieval Roots of the Industrial Revolution" (n. 17 above), 109; Basalla (n. 5 above), 148 ; Major (n. 5 above), 232. 55.
137. Benoit and Rouillard (n. 43 above), 193-97, 208-14. See also Patrice Beck, "Wood, Iron, and Water in the Othe Forest in the Late Middle Ages: New Findings and Perspectives," in Smith and Wolfe (n. 4 above), 173-84.
138. Benoit and Rouillard (n. 43 above), 193-97, 208-14. See also Patrice Beck, "Wood, Iron, and Water in the Othe Forest in the Late Middle Ages: New Findings and Perspectives," in Smith and Wolfe (n. 4 above), 173-84.
139. Holt, Mills of Medieval England, 156-58; Langdon, "Water-Mills and Windmills in the West Midlands" (n. 49 above), 435, and "Lordship and Peasant Consumerism" (n. 11 above), 14; Lucas, "Machinariarum Nihil Ex Deo" (n. 51 above), chap. 2 and apps. F and G. It is clear from this research that Carus-Wilson was wrong to claim more than sixty years ago that the English fulling industry was a sector of the medieval economy from which "a considerable profit could be derived"; see Carus-Wilson (n. 3 above), 52.
140. Holt, Mills of Medieval England, 156-58; Langdon, "Water-Mills and Windmills in the West Midlands" (n. 49 above), 435, and "Lordship and Peasant Consumerism" (n. 11 above), 14; Lucas, "Machinariarum Nihil Ex Deo" (n. 51 above), chap. 2 and apps. F and G. It is clear from this research that Carus-Wilson was wrong to claim more than sixty years ago that the English fulling industry was a sector of the medieval economy from which "a considerable profit could be derived"; see Carus-Wilson (n. 3 above), 52.
141. Holt, Mills of Medieval England, 156-58; Langdon, "Water-Mills and Windmills in the West Midlands" (n. 49 above), 435, and "Lordship and Peasant Consumerism" (n. 11 above), 14; Lucas, "Machinariarum Nihil Ex Deo" (n. 51 above), chap. 2 and apps. F and G. It is clear from this research that Carus-Wilson was wrong to claim more than sixty years ago that the English fulling industry was a sector of the medieval economy from which "a considerable profit could be derived"; see Carus-Wilson (n. 3 above), 52.
142. Holt, Mills of Medieval England, 156-58; Langdon, "Water-Mills and Windmills in the West Midlands" (n. 49 above), 435, and "Lordship and Peasant Consumerism" (n. 11 above), 14; Lucas, "Machinariarum Nihil Ex Deo" (n. 51 above), chap. 2 and apps. F and G. It is clear from this research that Carus-Wilson was wrong to claim more than sixty years ago that the English fulling industry was a sector of the medieval economy from which "a considerable profit could be derived"; see Carus-Wilson (n. 3 above), 52.
143. Holt, Mills of Medieval England, 156-58; Langdon, "Water-Mills and Windmills in the West Midlands" (n. 49 above), 435, and "Lordship and Peasant Consumerism" (n. 11 above), 14; Lucas, "Machinariarum Nihil Ex Deo" (n. 51 above), chap. 2 and apps. F and G. It is clear from this research that Carus-Wilson was wrong to claim more than sixty years ago that the English fulling industry was a sector of the medieval economy from which "a considerable profit could be derived"; see Carus-Wilson (n. 3 above), 52.
144. Langdon, "Water-Mills and Windmills in the West Midlands," 436. Holt, Langdon, and I have found a number of examples of lay and ecclesiastical lords licensing small entrepreneurs to operate and maintain industrial mills on their land for a nominal annual fee, suggesting that these mills were not earning large sums of money and were no threat to lordly revenues.
145. Holt, Mills of Medieval England, 158.
146. John Muendel, "The Distribution of Mills in the Florentine Countryside," in Pathways to Medieval Peasants, ed. J. A. Raftis (Toronto, 1981), 89-95.
147. Benoit and Rouillard, 195-96. To the best of my knowledge, there have been no data published to date on the earnings of English forge mills.
148. See Holt, "Mechanization and the Medieval English Economy" (n. 12 above), 149-56. For example, Holt's observation that most industrial milling took place in small workshops producing for local markets undoubtedly holds true for England, but it is not so clear that it does for France or Italy.
149. Astill and Langdon, Medieval Farming and Technology (n. 12 above); Wikander, Handbook of Ancient Water Technology (n. 4 above); Squatriti, Working with Water in Medieval Europe (n. 23 above).
150. Astill and Langdon, Medieval Farming and Technology (n. 12 above); Wikander, Handbook of Ancient Water Technology (n. 4 above); Squatriti, Working with Water in Medieval Europe (n. 23 above).
151. Astill and Langdon, Medieval Farming and Technology (n. 12 above); Wikander, Handbook of Ancient Water Technology (n. 4 above); Squatriti, Working with Water in Medieval Europe (n. 23 above).
152. At a recent medieval history conference a well-known historian of technology asserted that "England was a technological backwater during the Middle Ages" in response to comments by other scholars that the relative rarity of industrial mills in medieval England clearly problematized claims that there had been an industrial revolution in the Middle Ages. Some recent studies which undermine that historian's view are Bruce M. S. Campbell, James A. Galloway, and Margaret Murphy, "Rural Land-Use in the Metropolitan Hinterland, 1270-1339: The Evidence of Inquisitiones Post Mortem" Agricultural History Review 40 (1992): 1-22; Bruce M. S. Campbell et al, A Medieval Capital and Its Grain Supply: Agrarian Production and Distribution in the London Region c. 1300 (London, 1993); and Astill and Langdon, esp. Langdon, "Was England a Technological Backwater in the Middle Ages?" (n. 12 above), 275-92 .
153. At a recent medieval history conference a well-known historian of technology asserted that "England was a technological backwater during the Middle Ages" in response to comments by other scholars that the relative rarity of industrial mills in medieval England clearly problematized claims that there had been an industrial revolution in the Middle Ages. Some recent studies which undermine that historian's view are Bruce M. S. Campbell, James A. Galloway, and Margaret Murphy, "Rural Land-Use in the Metropolitan Hinterland, 1270-1339: The Evidence of Inquisitiones Post Mortem" Agricultural History Review 40 (1992): 1-22; Bruce M. S. Campbell et al, A Medieval Capital and Its Grain Supply: Agrarian Production and Distribution in the London Region c. 1300 (London, 1993); and Astill and Langdon, esp. Langdon, "Was England a Technological Backwater in the Middle Ages?" (n. 12 above), 275-92 .
154. At a recent medieval history conference a well-known historian of technology asserted that "England was a technological backwater during the Middle Ages" in response to comments by other scholars that the relative rarity of industrial mills in medieval England clearly problematized claims that there had been an industrial revolution in the Middle Ages. Some recent studies which undermine that historian's view are Bruce M. S. Campbell, James A. Galloway, and Margaret Murphy, "Rural Land-Use in the Metropolitan Hinterland, 1270-1339: The Evidence of Inquisitiones Post Mortem" Agricultural History Review 40 (1992): 1-22; Bruce M. S. Campbell et al, A Medieval Capital and Its Grain Supply: Agrarian Production and Distribution in the London Region c. 1300 (London, 1993); and Astill and Langdon, esp. Langdon, "Was England a Technological Backwater in the Middle Ages?" (n. 12 above), 275-92 .
155. Thomas Glick, personal communication, April 2004.
156. Al-Hassan and Hill (n. 24 above), 54, 242-44; Hill, Studies in Medieval Islamic Technology (n. 27 above), V-184.
157. Al-Hassan and Hill (n. 24 above), 54, 242-44; Hill, Studies in Medieval Islamic Technology (n. 27 above), V-184.
158. Bradford Blaine, "The Enigmatic Water-Mill," in On Pre-Modern Technology and Science: A Volume of Studies in Honor of Lynn White Jr., ed. Bert S. Hall and Delno C. West (Malibu, 1976), 175,
159. and "The Application of Water Power to Industry" (n. 11 above), 140-41.
160. Pacey, Technology in World Civilization (n. 27 above), 10-11.
161. With regard to various claims for fulling mills in Europe from the second half of the tenth century, see Forbes, "Power" (n. 5 above), 610; White, Medieval Technology and Social Change (n. 5 above), 84; Gille, "The Problems of Power and Mechanization" (n. 5 above), 456. None but White, however, provides sources. As Wikander has commented, "[t]he earliest alleged mills, Toscana 983, Dauphiné c. 990, Milano 1008, etc., are matters of doubt"; "Industrial Applications of Water-Power" (n. 4 above), 406, n. 27. As mentioned above, I have not yet had an opportunity to verify the Benedictine example from 962 cited by Benoit and Rouillard.
162. With regard to various claims for fulling mills in Europe from the second half of the tenth century, see Forbes, "Power" (n. 5 above), 610; White, Medieval Technology and Social Change (n. 5 above), 84; Gille, "The Problems of Power and Mechanization" (n. 5 above), 456. None but White, however, provides sources. As Wikander has commented, "[t]he earliest alleged mills, Toscana 983, Dauphiné c. 990, Milano 1008, etc., are matters of doubt"; "Industrial Applications of Water-Power" (n. 4 above), 406, n. 27. As mentioned above, I have not yet had an opportunity to verify the Benedictine example from 962 cited by Benoit and Rouillard.
163. With regard to various claims for fulling mills in Europe from the second half of the tenth century, see Forbes, "Power" (n. 5 above), 610; White, Medieval Technology and Social Change (n. 5 above), 84; Gille, "The Problems of Power and Mechanization" (n. 5 above), 456. None but White, however, provides sources. As Wikander has commented, "[t]he earliest alleged mills, Toscana 983, Dauphiné c. 990, Milano 1008, etc., are matters of doubt"; "Industrial Applications of Water-Power" (n. 4 above), 406, n. 27. As mentioned above, I have not yet had an opportunity to verify the Benedictine example from 962 cited by Benoit and Rouillard.
164. Al-Hassan and Hill, 54; Pacey, 10-11, 42; Hill, Studies in Medieval Islamic Technology, XVIII-10; Gille, "The Problems of Power and Mechanization," 456-57.
165. Al-Hassan and Hill, 54; Pacey, 10-11, 42; Hill, Studies in Medieval Islamic Technology, XVIII-10; Gille, "The Problems of Power and Mechanization," 456-57.
166. Al-Hassan and Hill, 54; Pacey, 10-11, 42; Hill, Studies in Medieval Islamic Technology, XVIII-10; Gille, "The Problems of Power and Mechanization," 456-57.
167. Al-Hassan and Hill, 54; Pacey, 10-11, 42; Hill, Studies in Medieval Islamic Technology, XVIII-10; Gille, "The Problems of Power and Mechanization," 456-57.
168. Blaine, "The Application of Water Power to Industry," 103-15. Although the Chinese invented the papermaking process, they do not seem to have applied water-power to it until around 1690, which would imply that they adopted this technology either indirectly from Western Europe or directly from the Islamic Near East. Needham (n. 9 above), 394.
169. Considering that medieval France is considered in some quarters to have been technologically backward, the finding that with respect to all seven of the most commonly appearing types of industrial water mill France was a clear leader should give some pause to those who have held this view in the past.
170. White argues for such a pan-European industrial revolution in Medieval Technology and Social Change, 88.
171. This is not to say that these were the only geographical areas of technological innovation in the later medieval period.