A Roman Printing Press

This is the first time I've tried to post my own thread.So hat in hand before all the village elder's.The question I'd like to ask is whether the introduction of something like a printing press into the Roman age would act as a precursor to a modern industrial age ,or whether it would have only a minor affect on history.I'm basing this on the theory that the bigger the base of knowledge available to the masses (sorry if that sounds to marxist) the faster new ideas are taken up and applied.Is this jumping the gun a bit?

p.s.I'd like to apologise for posting a reply on one of the other threads in caps,i did'nt realise what it implied at the time.Pick the computer illiterate newbie anyone...

I would have preferred a Greek printing press

because the Romans had a noted disdain for abstract scientific knowledge. We need a press--as well as paper.

Paper would be nice, but isn't necessary. Papyrus is only moderately more expensive at this point.

THe effects would be quite explosive. I won't guarantee an industrial revolution (simply because of the huge number of butterflies obscuring the view), though I see it as a definite possibility. however, the survivability of ancient culture just increased by several orders of magnitude. This will change everything, especially if it is introduced prior to christianisation.

Imagine a world where the teachings of the Desert Fathers must compete with paperback editions of Kale Chariklea and the collected works of Elephantis. A world where Pliny's Natural history is available in every library in the Empire and every army doctor travels with his own Dioskourides, where Hypatia's lectures are sold at street corners in Athens and Pergamon and even the middle class can afford the collected works of Homer. Give it about a century and people will start printing useful knowledge compendia like "how to build watermills and sigillata-kilns" or "making your own cosmetics".

Observe, if you will, the double jumps in historical memory: the tiny amount of knowledge we have from before writing becomes prevalent in any culture to the knowledge we have of it after writing comes into widespread use, and again, the vast broadening of our knowledge from the introduction of printing onwards. I am also convinced that printing exerts a strongly levelling and somewhat conservative effect on literature and daily culture by making the memory of previous generations so easily accessible. That means that, whatever the other changes, we might well still be reclining on couches to dine on seafood in honey glaze and brined cooked ham with a pine nut liguster sauce - even though we may be doing it in the ramshackle huts of a Chinese plantation colony, or on a sublight colony ship bound for Atair.

Cheap paper is also important. You need the type for making newspapers as well as books. Newspapers make paper, ink, and type cheap enough for booksellers to buy for their smaller market.
You get a government controlled newspaper of court gossip or forum news, depending on the period, and some people going around slapping up posters everywhere depending on how cheap it is. Books come later.
You might use a stylus and mimeograph approach. That gives you graphics and letters. For mimeograph you need a perforated screen with wax on it. Scrape off the way where you want the ink to go through. It doesn't need to be rotary, just a printing press is good enough. Figure on a production run of a thousand posters read by 100,000 people every day in Rome, and less in other cities.
Lithographic is more expensive, but gives better reproduction for books.

The importance of the printing press would also be felt in the Army (a standard officer manual) and obbviously in the bureaucracy (I can easily see an explosion of forms and rules and regulations for everything. It would fit very well Roman way of thinking).
On the other side of things, there would be a symmetric explosion of libelous and scandalous "gazettes". I would expect that the Romans, who always loved gossip, would be enthusiastic about this. It would be the strongest help to literacy, and diffusion of ideas.
It might become a bit more difficult when you get to the issue of religious writings and pamphlets, in particular after Christianity has become a state religion.

Anzac 15

I was thinking along pretty much the same line in regards to the consequences for the major religion's.With an earlier printing press there's bound to be alot more competion with other religions advocating their own "bible's".So I'm not sure what would happen to christianity.At the least it's probaly going to look a lot different,and maybe have to share european history with a few other player's.
I like the idea that a lot more of roman knowledge and culture will be preserved.Does this mean no dark ages?
I think that in the short term there's going to be a lot more cross pollination between provinces in the empire both established and recently conquered.What happens when it becomes possible for anyone,especially romes enemies,to pick up a book on roman military tactic's,or engineering etc.etc.?
This might even speed up the fall of the roman empire.According to the brief bio I read regarding the gutenberg press,one of the more immediate consequences of the press was to promote a sense of nationalism among countries as they embraced printing,promoting their own history and cultures.Or maybe the press actually cements roman culture more thoroughly?
Anyway,thanks to everyone who provided feedback.

The presence of more than one religion in Europe (or, better, in the territory of the Roman Empire) would be a sure blessing. It would be likely to avoid a long list of religion wars, and promote freedom of thinking.
I would not be so worried about barbarians getting hold of Roman manuals: to apply them properly it would mean that they have to start being civilised. After that, it is not so important who wins, civilization wins.
The Greco-Roman culture would be definitely strengthened: no Dark Ages, maybe just a dimming of culture (pestilences, climate cooling, social crisis). Obviously, there would not be a Renaissance similar to OTL, but in general it should be a better world

question of industrial rev.

I have to say, I like this discussion!
I think, the existance of printed information would spread knowledge all over the world.
Universities would be established at least 500 years earlier than in OTL. Experiments would have started earlier, and the ability of mankind to manipulate material in order to create machines increases.

But what of Slavery

As I understand it, the copying of books was the work of slaves. In the Roman Empire slaves did most of the second tier bureaucratic work, ie they were scribes, teachers, recordkeepers, copyists etc. They wouldn't usually originate work, but they kept it and passed it on.

Would scroll merchants and publishers be anxious to help promote an invention that would undermine they value of their inventory and manufacturing process?

OTOH the PP is arguably the most powerful agent of change ever invented. Less than fifty years after its inception in OTL almost 10 million (I think, it could be one million but I think its more, but 10 mill seems incredible, but its the number I remember) books existed in Europe and printing was an established profession. Also, Rome is not the only center of learning in the Roman world, other great cities, less slave dependent, might have use for the PP if Rome doesn't.

Like maybe, Jerusalem. A Jewish based explosion of knowledge and maybe even Industrial Revolution?

NapoleonXIV said:

As I understand it, the copying of books was the work of slaves. In the Roman Empire slaves did most of the second tier bureaucratic work, ie they were scribes, teachers, recordkeepers, copyists etc. They wouldn't usually originate work, but they kept it and passed it on.

Would scroll merchants and publishers be anxious to help promote an invention that would undermine they value of their inventory and manufacturing process?

OTOH the PP is arguably the most powerful agent of change ever invented. Less than fifty years after its inception in OTL almost 10 million (I think, it could be one million but I think its more, but 10 mill seems incredible, but its the number I remember) books existed in Europe and printing was an established profession. Also, Rome is not the only center of learning in the Roman world, other great cities, less slave dependent, might have use for the PP if Rome doesn't.

Like maybe, Jerusalem. A Jewish based explosion of knowledge and maybe even Industrial Revolution?

Click to expand...

The old 'slavery as an enemy to progress' idea is really not all that convincing when you look at historical fact. Now, I'm sure there would be great opposition from copyists and booksellers initially, but I'm sure there was also opposition by waterbearers and sellers to aqueducts, and that didn't stop anyone. Anyd anyway, there is no real risk of saturating the market (books were invariably rare commodities in Rome) and skilled scribes and copyists could always become typesetters and letterwriters. One tends to forget that the printing revolution did not destroy many jobs - there was still demand for written text, and printshops employed plenty of people. It was the output that increased.

As to 'other citioes' - definitely. I don't think Rome - under close supervision by imperial troops (some scholars estimate as many as one in three adult men in the city of Rome were soldiers, though one in ten is more realistic), full of agents, and beset by the intrigue of the senatorial class - is the safest place for printing anyway (though there'd of course be a market - not for handbills, I guess, but for books, sure). The Jews would surely love it (as would the Samarians - which could start interesting little disputes about who gets to sell books where, and who gets to burn whose printing presses). If the Christians are already around as a distinct group, so would they (though if the Jews get the press, I doubt the Christians have a chance). Alexandria, Pergamon, Athens and Antioch are all good candidates for printing centers, too. I'm guessing someone will sooner or later print the 'Secrets of the Pythagoreans' (there goes the mystique), and a number of other sacred texts (frex, Mithraism, the cult of Isis, Iuppiter Dolichenus, and other popular groups could develop a scriptural tradition - probably not like that of Christianity or Judaism, but quite possibly something akin to Buddhist scriptures or the Vedas). Generally, magic will briefly become a lot more popular (because now more peopkle can do it), then less popular (because now more people can find out it doesn't work very well).

Some other ideas:

- it would drive an earlier systematisation of roman law. The whole affair was horribly confused because it was intended as precedent-based case law, but most precedents were recorded only locally. If, say, all provincial courts reported their precedent decisions to Rome annually and they get winnowed by the great jurists and printed with the years Imperial Rescripts and changes to the Praetorian Edict, the price of a slim volume (or a narrow scroll) keeps the provinces in the loop. We may never see the development of what modern legal theory knows as 'Roman Law', ie the Digests of Justinian.

- Government would be run more smoothly because information could be concisely packaged, though updating would be a problem. It might also lead to greater efficiency as the idea of 'proper channels' takes hold.

- It might require greater systemsatisation in all manner of areas, and thereby drive a more investigative and scientific mindset. The Empiricists, for example, would have been very much at home with this. THey might even come out on top if they had the huge collations of fact their approach required, rather than being displaced by concise, but ultimately wrong, theoretical frameworls.

Anzac 15

What Alayta said about earlier universities and the faster spread of knowledge sought of struck a cord with me.I'm assuming it would'nt be too long before the persian(?)empire developed their own press,and maybe from there an indian or chinese press.I think i recall someone in earlier posts saying that indian culture was pretty advanced in mathematics and metal's,not to forget china in the science's? and philosophy.This sort of im
formation being brought to rome by some merchant has to kick start a lot .
Even some small changes in the knowledge base can have consequences(this is sort of unrelated?),like maybe some small time yokel,invents the horse stirrup a few centuries earlier(introduced? by the Avar's 6th century)and radically change's romes view of cavalry?

once the printing press is invented, there is really no way of stopping it (unless there is really a lack of papyrus). The same people who own copysts shops (and the slaves who do the copy work) would quickly see the advantage in selling the slaves and setting up a press.
The price of book would plummet down, since not only you do not need a lot of slave hours, but you can print on materials cheaper than vellum.
The advantage in terms of recording judicial cases is obvious. i still think the bigger customer will be the imperial bureaucracy, who will go on to a binge creating forms for everything.
In OTL the invention of the printing press brought off an a true revolution: amittedly, it was at the peak of Renaissance, but I would be surprised if the Mediterranean were not to undergo a minor Renaissance too. And I'm quite sure the Persian empire would get the press.
No way the imperial police could hold the tide even if they wanted to: in OTL the Inquisition and the Syllabus were not able to make a dent

I think I disagree with the idea that it would freeze cultural norms though, Carl.

How much are like burghers in Nuremberg of 1500?

TheLoneAmigo: look at my reply to the Histroy of the forumthread. I actually made an ATL of this forum.

Books are prime trading material. The empire would print Aramaic books in huge quantities, which would leak to India, which would print it's own books, which would leak to China, which would print it's own books, which would leak back the same way.
It was too far for people to commonly travel. It's not to far for books to travel. A book about printing technology with illustrations would appear pretty quickly. Any technology book with illustrations would spread. Mathematics textbooks, herbologies, siege engine design, etc.
Now what about dictionaries. Think what a Latin to Aramaic to Hindi to Chinese dictionary would do to spread knowledge. Of course, they would let errors build up along the way as they were repeatedly translated.

Wouldn't this spell great things for (a) Literature (b) News/Current Affairs and (c) Science and Technology.

After its invention it would hardly be something one could supress.

What kind of alphabet was being used at this time?

Pax Publish Romana

This is my first post to a web site right down my alley. The problem with a printing press at this time is not printing, but what it could print. Roman was basically a fascist state, at least during the time of the Ceasars. Anything that would promote sedition would be thrown to the bon-fires of the vanities.
No, I don't think a press would get off the ground. Or if it did, it would only publish the views of the state. Perhaps, a small publishing house in Britania might survive, out of the way and next to Hadrians Wall.

Faeelin said:

I think I disagree with the idea that it would freeze cultural norms though, Carl.

How much are we like burghers in Nuremberg of 1500?

Click to expand...

Well, many of us still share very similar views on family structure, economic 'good sense', propriety, the functions of government and authority, and social mores, not to mention table manners, time organisation and 'family values'. Sure things have changed, but these changes have been more of degree than kind. We are much more like a nuremberger of 1500 than he was like a Carolingian scararius, a Roman citizen, or an Aztec or Chinese of his time. And if you go back the mere 70 years it takes to largely escape the effects of the 'New Media' (radio, television, film, audio recording) you get to see a society far more similar.

Printing can spread new ideas quickly, but it can also spread old ideas quickly...

Djingodjango said:

This is my first post to a web site right down my alley. The problem with a printing press at this time is not printing, but what it could print. Roman was basically a fascist state, at least during the time of the Ceasars. Anything that would promote sedition would be thrown to the bon-fires of the vanities.
No, I don't think a press would get off the ground. Or if it did, it would only publish the views of the state. Perhaps, a small publishing house in Britania might survive, out of the way and next to Hadrians Wall.

Click to expand...

Doubt it. Of course, the state would not allow anything that fomented dissent or inappropriate conduct as it saw this, but that was a fairly flexible concept at the time. Also, bear in mind that the means of controlling society were rather limited. It is well conceivable that the current government would suppress the first printing press because it looks like a good idea (they did that with other things, for no apparent cogent reason), but if printing is established it will be allowed, if sporadically monitored. Who could possibly read that much stuff.

Naturally printing won't start out as a subversive power. Gutenberg printed bibles, Latin grammars, homilies and government forms . A Roman press would likely print grammar primers, classics, epic poems and panegyrics. But the genie is out of the bottle and it can't go back - at least, not without a societywide consensus.

Hmmm...totalitarianism always needs some form of mass communication technology to spread its doctrine.

If the Roman Empire's government quickly exerted control on the printing press, and monopolised its use it could be enough to make Rome into a totalitarian dictatorship more akin to those of the twentieth century.