Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Hmm, I reckon that canal technology could be reasonable to provide the Romans for distribution.

Romans had a lot of hydro engineering know how and a lot of civil engineering capacity. An early Victorian level of canal engineering should be doable. That would allow better distribution of bulk goods including grain.

The Romans already knew how to build canals, I think. So any minor improvements and techniques would probably appeal to them and be easy to integrate.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
I'll give you crop rotation, but preservation and distribution requires industrial techniques and technology. You'll have to give them an entire technology base for those.

You know, there is a technique that would be extremely easy to port back tothe Romans, and revolutionize their food preservation. Canning. They've already got amphora to spare, and can create airtight seals. All you need is the knowledge to boil the cans and bottles for long enough, and it will be preserved for a much longer period of time. Granted, they won't be up to modern standards, but that would advance food preservation by centuries. And even if fired clay wouldn't work, Romans had plenty of metal working industry. You don't even need to explain the germ theory, just show that it works and you're set.

Food preservation's a big one. The Romans were able to get vast quantities of food to the urban areas, but then had to organise vast food orgies to consume it all before it spoiled. That's why the word "vomitorium" exists. In Latin, anyway.

That one seems to have been debunked

https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/vomitorium

Yeah, they did not actually eat to the point of vomiting just so they can eat again. That's an old myth.
I'm pretty sure they already used amphora and salt for food preservation, but I can see them taking the concept of canning and adapting it to their use.

Canning is also pretty simple to do. Granted, making the tins/cans isn’t something just anyone can do. But given canning was done on the American Frontier, Roman farms being considerably better established would most definitely have been able.

Even just making canned food last 12 months would be a major development I’d imagine.

Basic germ theory, like pasteurisation would pay dividends as well, as it helps ensure a healthy workforce, which is a productive workforce, whether you pay them or not.

Now I wonder if Rome had thermometers, and if not, when were those invented.

I love this thread!

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Canning is also pretty simple to do. Granted, making the tins/cans isn’t something just anyone can do. But given canning was done on the American Frontier, Roman farms being considerably better established would most definitely have been able.

Even just making canned food last 12 months would be a major development I’d imagine.

Basic germ theory, like pasteurisation would pay dividends as well, as it helps ensure a healthy workforce, which is a productive workforce, whether you pay them or not.

Now I wonder if Rome had thermometers, and if not, when were those invented.

I love this thread!

Conceptually it's been around for a while. Galen was the one who proposed that hot and cold could be measured on a scale, and Philo of Byzantium created a pneumatic device that moves liquid in response to a vacuum formed by heat as part of an experiment, that was later expanded upon by Hero of Alexandria (who was also arguably the inventor of the first steam engine, funnily enough).

However, the thermometer that we know of today, that is, a sealed glass tube with a liquid inside that responds to temperature with precise measurements, was developed in the mid-17th century.
Prior to this you had thermoscopes, which are basically just thermometers except they didn't give precise values and just showed temperature differences. Those were invented in the late 16th century by Santorio.

Canning can be tricky. Get it wrong and its the ideal environment for botulism to develop, which is invariably fatal before the development of ventilators.

Canning would require the ability to make cans, or some analog like glass jars, in quantity. Even today canning has a moderately high failure rate, and that is with well made jars/cans, it would be pretty bad if you were making it artisanally.

Once you have cans and lids you can do it anywhere you can boil water, but making cans/glass jars and lids that could do a proper seal would be very difficult and expensive.

 Grey Templar wrote:
Canning would require the ability to make cans, or some analog like glass jars, in quantity. Even today canning has a moderately high failure rate, and that is with well made jars/cans, it would be pretty bad if you were making it artisanally.

Once you have cans and lids you can do it anywhere you can boil water, but making cans/glass jars and lids that could do a proper seal would be very difficult and expensive.

Yes, hence why I think rather than actual canning, it is more likely that they will use the concept of canning to make better amphora. Like, boil the jar so that it creates a vacuum seal or something.

It’d a horrible thought, but in terms of industry are we underestimating the application of manpower? Specifically unpaid, except for bed and board, slave labour?

Where we use a machine to stamp shapes into sheet metals, such a press could be man powered when you’re not having to worry about labour costs?

Romans had water power. With some updates to water-powered machinery, they could get basic industrialised stamping. But you'd need to bring that tech schematic back too.

 Haighus wrote:
Canning can be tricky. Get it wrong and its the ideal environment for botulism to develop, which is invariably fatal before the development of ventilators.

That is a very good point. Are there any ways to identify food that has become infested with botulism? I know we look for dents in cans, and especially deformed ones, but is there a distinct smell or taste?

Also, is there specifics on what needs to have been done wrong there?

For instance, not sterilising the receptacle, or undercooking the contents, not letting the contents cool before canning?

 Gitzbitah wrote:

 Haighus wrote:
Canning can be tricky. Get it wrong and its the ideal environment for botulism to develop, which is invariably fatal before the development of ventilators.

That is a very good point. Are there any ways to identify food that has become infested with botulism? I know we look for dents in cans, and especially deformed ones, but is there a distinct smell or taste?

No, that's what's terrifying about it. Botulism infected foods taste and smell normal. You don't know until you know.
It's why you have to be very careful with cans of food; if there's deformation it could be a sign of bacteria growth, as botulism bacteria does release gas, iirc.
Botulism is also anaerobic, so perfectly sealing the can isn't going to stop its growth.
You have to make the receptacle completely inhospitable to it, which is why salting is so effective and as such has been a way to preserve food for millennia. It also cannot grow in dry mediums; it needs moisture to survive and spread.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Also, is there specifics on what needs to have been done wrong there?

For instance, not sterilising the receptacle, or undercooking the contents, not letting the contents cool before canning?

Letting the contents cool before canning is how you encourage it. Undercooking is the other issue

Canned food goes in hot and sterile, and is sealed that way. If the seal breaks, it can be contaminated, but as Cthulhu mentions Clostridium Botulinum is strictly anaerobic and dies in normal air, so very unlikely to form simply from a seal break. You will get normal nastiness though.

The other common cause traditionally is sausages. Botulism as a word derives from the Latin for sausage.

Very useful bacteria though. Even though it produces the deadliest toxin known to mankind, that toxin has loads of medical uses as botox. In truly miniscule doses of course.

Mad props for getting “as Cthuhlu mentions” into your response

So laid back and conversational an eldritch terror, so he is.

It gets lonely in R'lyeh. I just like to chat about history.

IIRC the actual cause of botulism is if contaminated food is improperly cooked prior to canning. So not high enough temperature or it cools after cooking and is then sealed in the anoxic environment of the can. The botulinum bacteria itself is not toxic, it is the waste products it produces while it is growing. IE: It poops poison, the longer it grows the more poison will be in the can. The bacteria is killed by cooking, the poison is not.

Food like this is safe to eat if consumed soon after canning before the botulinum can start growing. Its just RNG of if the food is both contaminated, improperly cooked, AND allowed to sit in the can for enough time as botulinum is very slow growing. All 3 have to happen for it to occur.


Assuming a modern can of food is properly cooked, and thus sterile, and the can never gets damaged while it is being stored the food inside will remain edible basically indefinitely. It'll only be palatable for a few years and the nutritional value of the food will degrade, but the Fallout experience of finding 200 year old canned food that is still edible is perfectly plausible.

You can think of it like an RNG roll every time a can is made.

You roll for if the food is contaminated prior to cooking, and what it is contaminated with. You roll for if the food is properly cooked. You roll for if the can is free of defects and is itself properly sterilized. You roll for if the food is placed and sealed in the can correctly.

If all of those are successful, the food will remain sterile and edible basically indefinitely assuming the cans are not disturbed till opened for consumption. Botulinum happens specifically when the food is both randomly contaminated with botulinum AND the roll for proper cooking is also failed, but the remaining two rolls also have to succeed to keep oxygen out of the can.

 Grey Templar wrote:
. The botulinum bacteria itself is not toxic, it is the waste products it produces while it is growing. IE: It poops poison, the longer it grows the more poison will be in the can. The bacteria is killed by cooking, the poison is not.

Correct, it is an example of true food poisoning (which is surprisingly rare compared to a GI infection). You don't need a lot of botulinum toxin though.

Its closely related to tetanus, which is also caused by a neurotoxin produced by Clostridium Tetani.