Let me get something right. I just watched Julius Caesar (1953) and saw Brutus read a bound book. I then discovered the information about "codices" (codex), the earliest form of "book". They were pages bound on one side.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codex
A kind of notebook for writing was likely invented in Rome around 1st century AD which then spread to the Near East.
But I see overseas Chinese constantly telling us about their illustrious printing that came before Gutenberg's?
There even exists an article for Chinese bookbinding:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traditional_Chinese_bookbinding
Their books are dated around the first millennium, an eternity after the Roman version.
So all this time, Chinese "printing" has just been pressing shit onto single sheets, like they're passing out pamphlets and shit? Who gives a shit about in that case?
>>77721261
about it*
Has anyone else witnessed boasting about Chinese printing? This makes it look pointless.
>>77721261
>all this time, Chinese "printing" has just been pressing shit onto single sheets, like they're passing out pamphlets and shit?
AFAIK even euros had some printing method but it wasn't used as commonly as Northeastern Asia
the wonder about Gutemberg's method was that he mechanized printing. he speeded up the process and therefore flooded the market with books, which made the whole planet a lot better for all we know and care
same with industrial revolution, it's not about "doing it for the first time" but to make it standard procedure
ps: great thread but it desperatedly belongs on /his/. mods please?
>>77721929
I don't really care about history, I just want an international fight.
i dont know almost anything about it but as far as i know gutenberg is the first guy who made the metal mold way or something like that.
basically, chinese were writing books with a hand and making manuscripts when they need to copy it for all i know