sanjayjc 2 days ago

When visiting Bath[1] in UK (mentioned in the article), I learned the Romans used a clever contraption, the "three legged lewis", to lift heavy stones[2].

Referring to the diagram[3] on Wikipedia, a concave hole is first cut into the stone. Parts 1 and 2 of the lewis are inserted, one at a time. Inserting part 3 between 1 and 2 results in all three locking into place. A pin and ring at the top keeps the 3 parts from separating.

[1] https://www.romanbaths.co.uk

[2] https://bathgeolsoc.org.uk/journal/articles/2021/2021_Moving...

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewis_(lifting_appliance)#/med...

dtgriscom 2 days ago

The article lists a "Snake Bridge on the Macclesfield Canal". Here's a spiral bridge on that canal, but not the same one:

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Spiral+Bridge/@53.2849203,...

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Spiral+Bridge/@53.2850202,...

pugworthy 2 days ago

Though really amazing engineering, I'd say not all of them show "how they pulled it off". I'd like to know how the Byzantine geared mechanical calendar was "pulled off", especially those gears.

Barathkanna 2 days ago

Cool to see how much engineering relied on intuition and improvisation before modern tools existed. These methods look primitive now, but they worked because people understood materials so well. Makes me wonder how much of that hands-on knowledge we’re losing today.

  • Arainach 2 days ago

    It was often neither intuition nor improvisation, but rules. Bill Hammack's "The Things We Make" goes into a number of examples.

    For a slightly more modern example, take European Gothic Cathedrals. People weren't guessing, they weren't improvising, and they weren't relying on intuition - if they did most of them would have collapsed long ago.

    These structures were made without blueprints, and often many of the head masons may have been illiterate, but a knowledge of forms and rules such as "the thickness of the wall of an arch should be a bit more than a fifth the span of the arch" allowed for reliably producing stable structures.

    These rules were less precise than modern engineering math and mean that many of the structures are overengineered / have higher margins of error than are considered necessary in modern construction, but they are not based on intuition or guessing.

    • hamdingers 2 days ago

      Where did the rules come from?

      • bilbo0s 2 days ago

        The deaths of masons and builders. All the way back to Hammurabi.

        BTW, Hammurabi was particularly dastardly in his building code specifications. You could, of course, be put to death if a building or wall collapsed and killed someone. But that was just table stakes. Even Ur-Nammu had that much figured out.

        Hammurabi added on to the punishment by forcing you to rebuild the wall..

        to the specifications of reputable builders..

        at your own expense..

        and then be put to death.

        Don't even get me started on Asian "building codes" back in the day.

        HN user Arainach is right, no one was guessing, or intuiting, while building in a lot of these empires. It was wayyy too risky. Pretty much everyone was following rules passed down by the builders for centuries. In some cases, millennia. Only an actual ruler would dare even consider deviating from the known good building forms.

  • [removed] 2 days ago
    [deleted]
IAmBroom 2 days ago

Quibble: I hate, despise, loathe the dilution of the word "rare" to mean, well, in this case "somewhat interesting and not commonly known".

Photos cannot be rare. Physical copies of a photograph might be. Photos are by their nature singular instances of artistic or technical action, so all of them are equally rare.

  • bigstrat2003 2 days ago

    > Photos cannot be rare. Physical copies of a photograph might be.

    "Photo" means both the image itself and a physical copy of said image. So if you agree that physical copies can be rare, then either you agree that photos can be rare or you are idiosyncratically using a different definition of "photo" than everyone else.

  • cfraenkel 2 days ago

    >Photos cannot be rare

    BS. Only if you pedantically define 'photo' as collecting an image at xyz location at a particular instant. I'm quite certain that photos of the Eiffel Tower are NOT rare.

unsignedchar 2 days ago

Interesting collection but mostly focused on western world and mixing different eras so feels incoherent, like a low-effort ‘content creation’

agumonkey 2 days ago

the iranian windmills were not expected, neither the absorbing layers of south american cultures brilliant

vjust 2 days ago

This article seems to focus mainly on Western civilization. Not saying they aren't wonders. There were many engineering feats in the South/East Asian subcontinents that are not covered.

  • greenpizza13 2 days ago

    Syria, China, and Iran are 3 of the examples.

    • FlyingSnake 2 days ago

      It also features many examples from pre-Colombian South American cultures