Grimm Reaper said:Probably little or nothing. The printing press being invented in Europe might have been simply a fluke. It was the success of the printing press that gave Europe so many advantages, and Islamic society was simply not capable of matching this innovation.
For one thing, it was illegal under Koranic law to copy the Koran through this medium, thus creating a prominent industry whose members would surely and correctly have seen the printing press as an inherent threat to them.
For another, the first efforts to introduce the printing press to Islam were universally disastrous. To give one example, in the 18th Century Istanbul was the pre-eminent city of Islam, and the first printing press did so well that it was actually shut down for more than half of the time it was in the city. I mean for more years than it was allowed to operate!
Just FYI, the printing press was invented by the Chinese. (Afaik, there's no evidence Gutenberg didn't invent it independently, though.) Which actually tends to prove your point.Grimm Reaper said:The printing press being invented in Europe might have been simply a fluke.
Faeelin said:Suppose that around the year 900, a Muslim who presses olives for a living invents a printing press outside Toledo.
What happens now?
Abdul Hadi Pasha said:He would have immediately been put to death by the extremely powerful scribal guilds.
JoanneMerriam said:Just FYI, the printing press was invented by the Chinese. (Afaik, there's no evidence Gutenberg didn't invent it independently, though.) Which actually tends to prove your point.
Faeelin said:Err, why?
Nobody put Gutenberg to death, after all.
I beg to differ. The use of printing in China did greatly facilitate the spread both of technical knowledge, Buddhist scriptures and the Confucian canon. The revival of Confucian orthodoxy under the Song dynasty probably couldn't have taken place without the printing press.Bill Cameron said:Joanne,
Yes, the Chinese did invent the printing press... which their language then prevented them from using to any effect at all.
Hendryk said:I beg to differ. The use of printing in China did greatly facilitate the spread both of technical knowledge, Buddhist scriptures and the Confucian canon. The revival of Confucian orthodoxy under the Song dynasty probably couldn't have taken place without the printing press.
Besides, inventing the printing press won't do much good unless you also have paper. The Chinese did; by Gutenberg's time so did the Europeans. But the Andalus?
George Carty said:Islam prohibits representation of living things, which led to calligraphy becoming the dominant artform of the Islamic world. Hence the scribes gained an enormous amount of power...
Faeelin said:Once again, I'm confused. How does printing qualify as representing living things?
Matt Quinn said:No pictures--hence greater emphasis placed on writing.
Faeelin said:And printing encourages writing, so what's the problem?
Matt Quinn said:It might put the calligraphers out of business...why have a very expensive set of calligraphy when you can have some cheap printed material?
Now, perhaps the calligraphers can get bought off by paying them to design the type, but that won't last...