What if we called it the Flax Age instead of the Iron Age?

Re:What if we called it the Flax Age instead of the Iron Age? by garmaine on Wednesday November 20, 2019 @04:16PM (#21588599)

> China never produced a press.

I think you need to recheck your facts.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:What if we called it the Flax Age instead of the Iron Age? by zebrafish on Wednesday November 20, 2019 @05:04PM (#21589081)

So if you're saying hand-carved woodblock printing should be considered a "press", sure the Chinese had a "press." If you're going to tell me that the printing press could not have been the important factor because a hand-carved woodblock typeset is just as economical as an actual press with metal movable type, I'm willing to debate you on that.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:What if we called it the Flax Age instead of the Iron Age? by garmaine on Thursday November 21, 2019 @01:25AM (#21591880)

They had mechanical printing presses used for wood-blick illustrations. They also had movable type printing presses for long text. For some reason they didn’t combine the two until much later. Probably market forces though—Europe was rather unique in having demand for everyone to own a Bible during the reformation. Without needing thousands of copies, hand presses were easier.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:What if we called it the Flax Age instead of the Iron Age? by defen on Wednesday November 20, 2019 @05:15PM (#21589176)

China had moveable type but not a mechanical press.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:What if we called it the Flax Age instead of the Iron Age? by garmaine on Thursday November 21, 2019 @01:01AM (#21591793)

They had both.

[ Parent | on HN ]