Skip to content

Comment on Why didn't Rome have an industrial revolution?parent

Comments

Aside from wealth transfer capitalism is good for raising money for new ventures. Some of that kicked off around then eg.

The Muscovy Company was the first major chartered joint stock English trading company. It was established in 1555

and profitable ventures eg. by Sir Francis Drake

Drake returned to England in 1580 and became a hero; his circumnavigation raised an enormous amount of money for England's coffers, and investors received a return of some 5,000 per cent.

which may be increased enthusiasm for ventures.

That maybe incentivized people to get rich starting steam engine companies, somewhat like how SV works today, but not like that in ancient Rome?

Guessing a bit here. I'm not a historian. Quotes from Wikipedia.

I did to a visit to Lincolnshire a while back to research some family history of relatives who were there in the 1800s and while the place is a backwater now, it was very SV like back in 1850 with people getting rich quick and building huge houses based on the then tech boom with was railway engines.

AboutSource Built by g1lg1l

Hackerly is an independent reader for Hacker News, built on the public HN API. Not affiliated with Y Combinator.