Random musing re. minting vs. printing technology

lordmarcovan

If the ancient Greeks and Romans could do such intricate engraving work on coin dies (including the use of interchangeable letter punches), isn't it rather surprising that Western civilization didn't get the printing press and moveable type until the 1400s? You'd think the Romans would've come up with that. I think the Chinese figured it out before the West did.

Sure, the Middle Ages were a mostly illiterate time and most people who could read and write were priests or monks, but I find it rather astonishing that printing didn't evolve a lot sooner.

Or maybe it did, and all knowledge and evidence were lost in the Dark Ages, only to be rediscovered around the time of the Renaissance?

What if somebody were to dig up some clay jars filled with printed Roman documents sometime? That would be fascinating.

Just some random thought. My mind is all over the place, lately.

Rickc300

I think you are right that the technology was there as far as movable lettering to print documents but I don't think the printing material was readily available to make it feasable... You and I could, if given the raw materials make metal discs with engravings (gold and copper come to mind, right out of the ground, ready to be shaped) but I wouldn't have a clue as to how to produce paper or skins or any other printable material in the quantities needed to produce even a single encyclopedia that weighed less than a half ton.

Dang it! Now you have me thinking about it and I have already had trouble sleeping the last couple of nights!

covers

RS - Somehow I don't see the need for a printing press when every literate person in the Empire had enough slaves to transcribe any communication necessary without much cost.

Sapyx

As anyone with a computer knows, for printing to work, you need three things: the printer, the paper, and the ink. You need all three to make it work; if you've only got two, you ain't printing anything.

The ancient Western civilisations had the concept of a "printer", as demonstrated by their coins and seals, but they didn't have paper. The Romans used wax tablets for their temporary scribbling, and parchment and stone for more permanent writing, none of which take well to being printed on. The Egyptians had their papyrus, but it was thick and uneven, and normally in the form of scrolls, rather than sheets - this would have been awkward to use printing blocks on. And because the northern civilisations didn't have paper, they didn't bother developing ink suitable for use on paper. If some bright spark did think of the idea of pressing his coin die or signet ring into ink and sticking it onto the papyrus or parchment, the result would have been an unsatisfactory, fuzzy mess.

The Chinese, on the other hand, had much more "paper-like" paper (from mulberry bark), and ink science was much more developed in the East. All they needed to invent was the concept of a "printer" and, humans being generally lazy and seeking means of eliminating repetitive tasks, the concept wasn't long in coming.

It wasn't until the Middle Ages that the three necessary ingredients were brought together in Europe.

SaorAlba

<< <i>

The Chinese, on the other hand, had much more "paper-like" paper (from mulberry bark), and ink science was much more developed in the East. All they needed to invent was the concept of a "printer" and, humans being generally lazy and seeking means of eliminating repetitive tasks, the concept wasn't long in coming.

>>



They also invented paper money in the late 14th century.

lordmarcovan

Good point. I didn't think about the paper being the missing ingredient. But what about papyrus? The Egyptians had that, and the Romans conquered them.

covers

RS - Romans had papyrus - just simple economics really. Why print when you can transcribe using slave labor?

PS - Reminds me - I am looking for an Antony Legion style den. with "CHORTIS SPECULATORUM" inscription - these were for the cohorts who carried dispatches on the field (mail!)

lordmarcovan

<< <i>PS - Reminds me - I am looking for an Antony Legion style den. with "CHORTIS SPECULATORUM" inscription - these were for the cohorts who carried dispatches on the field (mail!) >>



I just gave away one of those Antony denarii with the galley on it! Dunno if it had your inscription or not. I guess not. It was in Newbiecollector's anniversary giveaway back in the spring.

My favorite ancient coin dealer has a relatively inexpensive one. The legends are weak but you can read ...HORTIS, anyway.

And somebody else has a nicer one with more complete legend (and pricetag!)

covers

RS - THANKS! The less horrible one of the those may serve till I find a decent example.

lordmarcovan

Steve McBride of Incitatus Coins has some good stuff at fair prices. He's been the source of the bulk of my Roman collection. You can deal with him with confidence.

(Edit- oh, but you meant the less horrible one. LOL. Steve's is pretty horrible, but priced accordingly. That other, pricier one is nicer though still low grade, but I have not done business with that particular dealer yet.)

Tough coin!

Sapyx

<< <i>...Antony Legion style den. with "CHORTIS SPECULATORUM" inscription - these were for the cohorts who carried dispatches on the field (mail!) >>


We're drifting further from LordM's subject, but the Speculatores were more than just mail carriers. They were the Empire's "internal security" force, a combination of bodyguard unit, courier service, military police force, counterinsurgency unit and "black ops" squad (kidnapping, torture, assassination, etc).

covers

Sapyx - My understanding is that most of the additional functions you mention were added much later than the issue date of ca. 32 BC. At the time they were minted, this branch of cohorts were akin to special messengers I think.

Actually, the subject is related to RS's topic as most of the field dispatches, letters from battlefield to Rome, etc. were on paper (papyrus). From my perspective as a postal historian, these coins really are the earliest artifacts that relate directly to carriage of mail. The cuniform tablets and cylinder seals that some postal historians talk about are less directly related and are more related to merchantile business, ownership, taxes and such.

Add-on: even if the messages were on slate using chalk stylus, they still qualify as "mail" by my definition.

lordmarcovan

These Speculatores are interesting, and I hadn't heard of them until they were just mentioned.

As this is a "random musings" thread, the topic is free to wander wherever it likes.

Hyperion

not thinking about the 'can we' part....

do you think the literate types in a position of power would require or even WANT a fully literate populace?

why did guilds hold thier secrets close? why the need for an 'inner circle'? there's no need, but it's the nature of humans.

lordmarcovan

Another good point, I suppose.

Back then, literacy was probably one of the bigger things that separated the "haves" from the "have-nots". It still is, of course, but probably not as much as in bygone eras, when there was no compulsory education.

I still find it hard to fathom that some bright Roman scribe didn't collude with some woodworkers and/or blacksmiths to invent a printing press for imperial proclamations or other documents that required mass copying and distribution. If they had, it would've saved those medieval monks a lot of work, but then I suppose we wouldn't have the Lindisfarne Gospels and the Book of Kells and all those beautifully illuminated medieval manuscripts.

But there is (was) the paper and ink problem, as Sapyx pointed out.

lordmarcovan

The Vindolanda Tablets are a fascinating peek at the way things must have been, at least in Britain around the time of Hadrian.

I had never heard of them until I saw a BBC TV show on "Our Top Ten Treasures", and was astonished to find that the #1 treasure on the list contains silver or gold; indeed, nothing but wood and ink!

I'm sure our resident postal historian knows all about them, though.

Actually, it was reading about the Nag Hammadi Library that steered me down this line of thought. Lately I've developed a fascination with old paper documents, which is probably just a side effect of my having stepped away for the past three months and done nothing but read and go to my dull job (where an Internet crackdown made me retreat back to old-fashioned printed material for something to keep my brain busy).

covers

RS - Thanks for the links. I saw the tablets briefly at the British years ago and had forgotten about them completely. I worked with an author about the early history of the mails ("From The Winged Heels of Mercury" by Zaven Seron) and the book had been completed long before I saw them, and before I was aware of the Roman coin.

lordmarcovan

<< <i>I saw the tablets briefly at the British years ago and had forgotten about them completely. >>




So you you're sayin' you completely forgot about seeing the Number One of Britain's "Top Ten" treasures?

I think such a memory would be seared onto my brain. But it's true they probably don't look like much. Small wonder that when the general public picked, the Sutto Hoo ship burial came out #1 and the Vindolanda Tablets #2.

Boy, I sure hope I get over to that side of the pond one day (metal detector stowed with the luggage, of course).

covers

RS - Only so many brain cells .... I spent more time on that particular trip looking at artifacts from Crete and early Summeria and even missed the Tapling collection of stamps (which I have since viewed twice).

covers

Last week I purchased my first big coin (a chistophorus of Caligula / Agrippina Jr. ).... figured it was as nice as I would find:

lordmarcovan

Yow.

That's the sort of loveliness that's beyond my budget, no doubt. Still, I think I can safely aspire to "intermediate" status.

Very nice!

PS- as to forgetting about looking at the Vindolanda tablets, I guess I can understand. One gets sensory overload in museums like that at times. All I can recall of the Smithsonian is the Wright Brothers' plane, the Hope Diamond, and the moon rocks.

ProofArtworkonCircs

<< humans being generally lazy and seeking means of eliminating repetitive tasks, the concept wasn't long in coming.>>
Now you have thrown my mind onto a tangent.
In the early days of steam engines, the valves were opened and closed by hand for each power stroke. Then one day the no account lazy Humphries boy rigged up STRING so the machine would run itself. When they saw what he had done, he was fired and an engineer replaced the string with metal rods and the self acctuating steam engine was invented.

lordmarcovan

I'm sure history is full of "lazy" folks like that who decided to "work smarter, not harder" and ended up inadvertently changing the world in some small (or large) way. That's one of the things I find so fascinating.