• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.

Tinto Talks #19 - 3rd of July 2024

Hello Everyone and Welcome to another Tinto Talks, the Happy Wednesday when we talk about the most secret game with the code name “Project Caesar”

This week we’ll talk about the ages and institutions, concepts that were first introduced in a patch to EU4. They were a convenient mechanic to make different eras feel different, but soon became too gamified with development ruining the institution game.

Every age introduces several new “REDACTED”, adds several possible new government reforms you can pick from, impacts the price stability of goods, and also has some direct impacts on every country. In every age, the amount of gold you pay for your raised levies will increase, and the size of the army you are expected to have increases. Each age is global in the world, but its true impact is gradual. There is no special mana you gain through achieving goals that you can use to stack modifiers with.

ages.png

Ages of Traditions have passed, and we have just entered the Age of Renaissance here..

Each age also has three institutions that will spawn, each will unlock “REDACTED” and spread across the world.

We have designed the institution spawns to be more rigid for the first ages, and be more flexible in later ages, to guide the game in a certain direction. For those of you who dislike the dynamic spawning of institutions, you can put it in “historical” mode, and it will spawn in the same location every time.

rule.png

There are only two options for this rule at the moment.

The spread takes time, as it can only spread through adjacent locations or across a single sealane, unless you have trade routes from a market center that has embraced it. The speed it spreads is also impacted by the literacy of the population. If you have embraced an institution, then it will spread in proportion to your control in your owned locations.

When an institution has spread to more than 10% of the population in your country, you can embrace it, meaning you will get access to the “REDACTED” it will give you.

As the technology system in Project Caesar is different than the one in EU4, missing an institution for a while is NOT a complete disaster, but more on that next week.

In later ages you can also start assigning a member of your cabinet to promote institutions in a province, which will then progress any institution you are aware of in the locations of that province. Promoting is heavily based on the burghers and the literacy of a location.

There are 6 ages in the game, and in 1337 we start in the Age of Traditions, and each age from there on lasts about a century.


age_1_traditions.jpg

It was the definitely the best of times...

Age of Traditions
Different societies have been established throughout the world for hundreds and thousands of years, and their foundations can be framed in traditions such as Legalism, Meritocracy, or Feudalism.

Legalism
We gave this institution the spawn point of Rome, even though there are plenty of places that could compete for it. Most of the Old World has this institution spread and embraced at the start of the game.

The theories behind Legalism have been integrating into Chinese societal structures for hundreds of years. The concept that pure idealism and domestic stability leads to a rich, prosperous state and a powerful army is deeply rooted in the forums of thought in the Eastern Asian domains. However, as merchants and migrants brought forth the exchange of ideas, the concept of Legalism made its way across the vast expanses of the Muslim world. There, it adopted the stance of a symbiotic relationship between heathens and believers in Islamic states. Legalism in Europe signified the rite of passage, from the dying grasps of the great Roman Empire to its remnant legal roots, many of which would later serve as the basis for new jurisprudence across the old continent.

Meritocracy
This has the birthplace in Beijing and at the start of the game, it has only spread through East Asia.

Many individuals of great prestige and in positions of power often chose to appoint those closest to them in influential spots. The advent of Meritocracy as an institution and a thought movement was largely popular in the courts of Imperial China. There, Confucius himself supported the notion that those who govern should do so on the basis of merit, not of inherited status. This led to the replacement of the Chinese nobility of blood ties to one based solely on meritocratic abilities. This institution's development would ripple across and beyond the borders of Asia and would eventually reach the royal courts of even European monarchs whose Nobles had a firm grasp on the mechanisms of power and authority.

Feudalism
This has its birthplace in Aachen, the capital of the Roman Empire under Charlemagne. It has spread in most of the Old World as well.

Over time, most societies develop a need for a common structure with stronger and more permanent institutions of government. After the fall of the Roman Empire, this need came to be filled by a number of institutions and customs that taken together are often considered to be part of the European Feudal system. For similar reasons, permanent government and societal systems have formed all over the world, some of which have roots that go far further back than Feudalism itself.


age_2_renaissance.jpg

Have we show this image before?

Age of Renaissance
A new era of knowledge, arts, and progress is emerging due to growing interactions and institutions in the medieval societies affected by Pax Mongolica, the Islamic Golden Age, and the European Renaissance.

Renaissance
This institution will spawn soon after the age starts in a Northern Italian City with a University. The historical location is Florence.

Starting now in the 14th century, the wealthy and powerful in the Italian City states have been patronizing artists and scholars willing to explore the old Roman and Greek societies of their forefathers. As a cultural movement the Renaissance already encompasses most of the region and has had a profound impact on literature, art, philosophy, and music. Humanist scholars are also analyzing the society in which they live, comparing it to the ideals of the Classical philosophers. Renaissance Humanism has grown into a more mature movement, ready to permeate all aspects of society. A new ideal for rulers as well as those who are ruled is spreading as quickly as the early Printers can distribute copies of these new ideas. A true Renaissance Humanist is an expert on everything from politics and philosophy to art, textual analysis, music, and architecture. The Renaissance is now ready to reshape the world to better fit its classical ideals.

Banking
This can spawn in any town or city with more than 1000 burghers in Europe, North Africa or the Middle East, where the owner has a strong “Capital Economy” Societal Value. The historical location is Genoa.

Money lending has existed since metal-based coins appeared in Antiquity. However, it depended on some individuals and their family groupings or on the Ancient States. A shift occurred in the Middle Ages, encouraged by the renewed growth of long-range commercial activities on the Eurasian continent and its peripheries. Specialized moneylenders began to organize when Jewish communities started operating between the Christian and Islamic worlds. However, the boom of credit demand that followed the Crusades in the 12th century encouraged merchants in the Italian city-states to create larger structures for money lending, effectively founding the first Banking institutions, such as the Peruzzi and Bardi houses. More instruments were developed, like bills of exchange and debt bonds, and Banking dynasties such as the Medici, Fugger or Welser soon became as powerful as States.

Professional Armies
This can spawn in any location in Europe, which has some manpower produced, where the owner has a “Quality” Societal Value. The historical location is Paris.

Armies have existed since war was invented, many thousands of years ago. However, their form has changed over the centuries and different types of recruitment and organization have developed in different cultures and periods. In the Late Middle Ages, armies in a wide range of societies relied on levies based on the structures of feudal society, with knights and footmen forming a core that was levied seasonally. In some regions, however, states were powerful enough to finance standing armies, with professional soldiers who would be available for duty throughout the year. This system was also developed in Europe after the outbreak of the Hundred Year's War, being one of the main changes that promoted a Military Revolution in the Early Modern Age. Increasing the size and quality of Professional Armies, while finding new sources of revenue to finance them, soon became one of the main challenges for rulers around the world.

age_3_discovery.jpg

This looks like a nice place to add to the Spanish Empire!

Age of Discovery
At the dawn of the Early Modern era new continents are being mapped while feudal society is slowly giving way to centralized states. For an enterprising state this age can see the foundation of a worldwide empire.

New World
This will spawn in any port in Western Europe or North Africa, with more than 2,000 burghers, and where the owner has discovered the Azores and the West African Coastline. The historical location is Sevilla.

The discovery of the New World has heralded a new era not only for the colonizers and the colonized, but it has also led to the spread of materials and techniques as well as a realization of the vastness of the globe. As animals, crop types, silver and diseases spread across the Atlantic, the first steps have been taken towards a truly global economy. With foreign lands and people being mapped and documented, ideas as well as religious and philosophical debate are increasingly being colored by what we have found in overseas societies. Great minds feel the need to question what was once truth, and from Valladolid to Fatehpur Sikri, the nature of the world is now up for debate.

Printing Press
This can spawn in any location with more than 2,000 burghers, where the owner produces more than 5 paper and has an “Outward” Societal Value. The historical location is Mainz.

The ability to mass-produce the written word would revolutionize the spread of information and in many ways early modern society as a whole. Pioneered by Renaissance men such as Venetian Printer Aldus Manutius, the new art helped fuel the Renaissance by making the translated classics more widely available. Later the Reformation benefitted greatly from the ability to spread critical publications and translations of the Holy Scriptures. Now that Printing has matured as a technique and spread throughout Europe, hundreds of thousands of copies of everything from Religious and Political pamphlets to scientific treatises and instructions on how to behave are circulating the continent. With print shops growing evermore commonplace, rulers have found it hard to contain the new technique as the comparatively easy means of production means censorship can be sidestepped by moving business across a border or even just changing the name on a title page.

Pike & Shot
This spawns in a location, which has some manpower produced, where the owner has Professional Armies, more than 20 Army Tradition and a “Land” Societal Values, and have the gunpowder technology. The historical location is Innsbruck.

A new type of warfare began to develop at the end of the 15th Century, in the midst of the Italian Wars. The generalization of pikemen in the Late Middle Ages as an alternative to men-at-arms who could successfully face heavy cavalry charges was accompanied by the development of portable firearms, mainly matchlock arquebuses and muskets. The soldiers now adopt a new formation, in which the pikemen form a square, while the arquebusiers fan out to the sides and front, and seek cover behind or inside the square in case the formation enters close combat. This new type of formation, called Pike & Shot, was favored by German Landsknechts and Spanish Tercios, and was soon adopted by other armies, reigning supreme on European battlefields for nearly two centuries, until superseded in the early 18th Century by line infantry formations armed with new flintlock muskets mounting bayonets.

age_4_reformation.jpg

The heretic is trying to defend his heresy.

Age of Reformation
From East to West this is the age of religious conviction, debates and mass movements. In Europe, the protestant churches are entrenched while millenarianism takes hold of Iran and religious Syncretism shapes Indian society.

Confessionalism
This spawns in a town or city in Europe, which has a printing press, where the owner is Catholic, and the dominant religion is Catholic, and has a “Spiritualist” societal value. The historical location is Augsburg.

Catholicism has been regarded as a unitary entity for a long time, but the advent of the various Protestant Faiths has put an end to that. With the rise of a myriad of different interpretations of what the Faith should be, Christianity is all but united. But where before any deviance from the Church could be easily labeled as heretic, now the lines creating the differences have become blurrier at least. As such, there has been an increasing interest both for religious and secular authorities alike to clearly define the shapes of their specific confessions, enforcing their particular rules and views on all aspects of faith and life. This allows them a more firm grip on the faith of their population, but also increases the differentiation and thus animosity with all the other confessions.

Global Trade
This spawns in a market center in a city anywhere in the world that has among the most value of goods traded. The historical location is Lisbon.

Goods have been moved across continents since antiquity. But where this was previously limited to a set number of routes and goods such as the manufactured goods of India and China finding their way across the Indian Ocean and along the Silk Road, all trade is now increasingly becoming part of a greater world network. With the discovery of the Americas, sea routes around Africa and the crossing of the Pacific Ocean, local trade networks are being connected into one world-spanning interconnected web. Silver mined in the Andes is now being boxed and taken via Europe all the way to China and India. Iron mined and wrought in Scandinavia is being sold in West Africa by English merchants, and others are making a fortune just distributing cloth and spices within the Southeast Asian trade sphere. Local Indian merchants are investing in future European trade ventures. It may still be early to speak of a truly Global Economy, but surely the first seeds have been sown.

Artillery
This will spawn in any city in the world that has a gunsmith and a metal workshop, and where the owner has an “Offensive” Societal Value. The historical location is Constantinople.

The invention of gunpowder in Song China led to the development of a new device that would employ its firepower in warfare, the artillery. Although it spread throughout Eurasia in the 13th Century, its use as a common weapon system did not happen until the 15th century, as improvements in the cannon length and gunpowder recipe made artillery much more powerful, now posing a threat to stone-built castles and fortifications, the most common in Europe. Soon artillery would be used not only in sieges but also on battlefields, as smaller caliber guns now featured the mobility required to be quickly deployed and used. Its final development as a key warfare system would come in the 18th Century, especially after Napoleon perfected its use at key points during battles.

age_5_absolutism.jpg

L'État, c'est moi.

Age of Absolutism
As governments wrest the absolute power in their countries from other parties, they are now able to devote themselves to the building of Empires. This is the age of the state, of rulers, and their armies.

Manufactories
This will spawn in any location with more than 100 building levels, and at least 20,000 Burghers, and where the owner has a “Capital Economy” Societal Value. The historical location is Derby.

While a number of technical innovations during the course of the 16th and 17th centuries have increased the output of production for some products such as iron or cloth to an extent, the biggest improvement in the field of production has come in the form of new forms of organization. By creating manufactories, often outside the city limits, merchant capitalists can both bypass the ancient guild laws that inhibit mass production, and pioneer ways to increase production through the organization and specialization of labor in one place. The forerunners of the later Industrialization were able to increase output by facilitating access to raw materials and mass organization of labor rather than by expensive new machinery. This is in itself a huge change over the often heavily regulated methods of old, however, and together with later technical advances this new mode of production will come to revolutionize society.

Scientific Revolution
This spawns in a location with a university, and a high average literacy, where the owner has a “Innovative” Societal Value. The historical location is Cambridge.

It is clear that the world is smaller now than ever before. The rise of a global trade and the printing industry led to an increased flow of people and ideas, allowing for a more widespread dissemination of knowledge. This in turn resulted in a more thorough questioning and analysis of the reality of the world. What was once just accepted as fact is now questioned, what was only poorly understood is now observed, and what was only supposed, tested. The recent advancements in areas such as mathematics, physics., or biology are undeniable, but the real revolution is the change in the perception and approach towards science itself and the way of understanding it. Systematic experimentation is the true scientific revolution, and it will surely change completely our conception of the world.

Military Revolution
This can spawn in any capital with a lot of military buildings and that has a population over 50,000. The historical location is Stockholm.

The continuous state of war affecting Europe in the 16th and 17th Centuries leads to a sharp increase in the size of armies, as a necessity born of the growing authority of competing absolutist regimes. The infantry is now armed en masse with flintlock muskets, greatly increasing their firepower and performance in battle by being deployed in the innovative line formation, replacing the old Pike & Shot. Those needs also affect the capabilities of the state administration as it continues to expand to handle the manpower and finances required by this increase in the size of the military. That also is spearheading the development of the supply chains required to feed and sustain armies, through intermediate depots that support the operational armies. The result of these advances would be none other than an upsurge of wars between increasingly militarized countries in the 18th Century.


age_6_revolutions.jpg

Its one way to deal with the nobility I guess?

Age of Revolutions
The questioning of rights, authority and the world itself during the Enlightenment has led to the rejection of the Ancient Regime. As Absolutism gives way to Revolution kingdoms may have to make place for Republics.

Enlightenment
This spawns in a location with a university, and a high average literacy, where the owner has an “Innovative” Societal Value. The historical location is Paris.

The last century has seen Rationalism and Empiricism gaining an ever-increasing popularity among the great minds of the age. In letters, publications and coffee houses, kings, scientists, philosophers, and littérateurs are discussing the merits of tolerance, the scientific method, and the spreading of the ideals of the Enlightenment to all of humanity. From universities or courts of enlightened monarchs, expeditions are being sent to measure, catalog, weigh, and map the world so that we can better understand the laws that govern everything around us. Others discuss the laws that govern society and try to reach an understanding of the Rights of Man. Great projects such as the colossal undertaking of creating a complete encyclopedia of all knowledge or a complete index of all plants, animals, and fungi in the world are being pursued for the greater good of humanity. The Light of Reason has been lit and many will not rest until it has been brought to all corners of the earth.

Industrialization
This will spawn in any location with more than 250 building levels, and at least 20,000 Burghers, and where the owner has a “Capital Economy” Societal Value. The historical location is Blackburn.

The dawn of the 18th century gave rise to many new institutions as man's thirst for growth took hold. Advances in the field of production, and manufacturing as well as the introduction of complicated machinery will change the world as we know it on a global scale. The rise of the Industrial Revolution brings about international and lasting changes not just in commerce and business but in the fabric of society itself. Inventions such as the power loom and steam engines shall push the capabilities of mankind to its highest zenith yet.

Levée en Masse
This can spawn in any capital with a lot of military buildings and that has a population over 200,000, and where the owner has a “Defensive” Societal Value. The historical location is Paris.

Warfare is an ever-evolving concept, innovated and honed generation after generation. The 18th century saw the rise of powerful empires, each with its own ambitions. To satisfy the need for expansion and provide the fuel necessary to fulfill these ambitions, new nationwide conscription laws will be drafted and signed in effect, raising armies of all unmarried young men, the size of which will shape the course of history.

Next week we talk about what replaced the technology and national ideas system for Project Caesar.
 
  • 214Love
  • 161Like
  • 44
  • 16
  • 8
  • 1Haha
Reactions:
Professional armies, tax and centralised states go together. Institutions that weren't present in Europe at game start were present in Europe a millenium earlier. Julius Caesar was a meritocrat. The elite of the Roman Empire justified their status by their education. They got their share of the surplus production of the Empire by running the bureaucracy that that extracted it from the peasantry on the Emperor's behalf. If they weren't literate they couldn't do the job, so literacy was (literally) beaten into them in their childhood. Roman elites were having their children beaten by their tutors until they could read the works of Caesar 1700 years ago because their status depended on it.

1250 years ago Charlemagne identified a problem. The holy books of Christianity were written in classical latin and knowledge of that had virtually disappeared. Scribes were making errors copying what they didn't understand, and priests were misinterpreting the word of god because they had never learnt the original language it was written about it and bringing scandal upon the church. Charlemagne wanted to be an Emperor and one of the things Emperors did was sort out this sort of issue.
Charlemagne sorted it out. He called in the leading experts, foreigners as well as locals, and then implemented their recommendations. There had to be an elite that was educated in classical Latin in the classical Roman manner. It had to be part of the general culture, not just a few scholars like Charlemagne's foreign experts. The church needed this elite to preserve the word of god in its original meaning and it wasn't good enough to teach it to adults. It had to be learnt in childhood. Henceforth those that might be destined for the church had classical Latin beaten into them in childhood.

It worked. Just 150 years ago the elite of Britain had Latin beaten into them in childhood. A properly christian education required it. I've read Caesar in translation, but my father had to pass an examination on his skill in reading Caesar in Latin in order to get into an elite University.

The Roman Empire and the Christianity it adopted cast a very long shadow over the continent, and Europe is not as different from China as either end of Eurasia might like to think. Empires at both ends of Eurasia needed literate bureaucrats to organise the taxation that funded their professional armies and came up with cultural solutions that have a lot of analogies between them.

Concentrations of wealth attract predators. There's a tension in these ancient empires between the share of the taxation that funds the lifestyle of the elite and the share that funds the professional armies that keep the barbarians at bay. Every so often a barbarian puts together a big enough horde and the army isn't big enough to deal with it, and the barbarians plunder some of the empire's wealth. Sometimes the barbarian realises that he could make the bureaucrats work for him instead and the barbarians become the new elite. Goths, Vandals, Mongols, Manchus, Arabs, Vikings, Spaniards, Englishmen.

Project Caesar just wants to cover one part of this oft repeating historical theme. How the European barbarians took over the Asian Empires. But it doesn't want to do it by representing the weaknesses of blobs to barbarians, so absurdities arise. All empires end in failure, but a commercial game can't end in inevitable failure for the player. The European barbarians were powered by the monotheistic culture of a failed empire. Their ability to plunder the world at a particular point in time is connected to peculiarities of that culture and a game that wants to give a particular set of barbarians the opportunity to take over a particular set of empires can't help but generalise those peculiarities.
 
  • 1
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I checked the
Charting the “Rise of the West”: Manuscripts and Printed Books in Europe, A Long-Term Perspective from the Sixth through Eighteenth Centuries by Buringh and Van Zanden. which is one of the sources for this work, and main source for comaparison between China and Europe. Numbers are just for "titles", not the books. They specificaly state they included manuscripts, separete volums of books, pamphelts, big works to fit the term "title". At the same time article does not provide real book amounts for China, using only "survived copies". Really no solid line to which this can be attributed. Works like a copy of Nongshu (136k words) is 1 title and Marc's Gospel (11k words) is 1 title, and a simple manuscript is 1 title. As example, Yongle dadain consisted of 22,937 scrolls, produced in 1408 would not be 11k works (= volumes), or 22937 scrolls, it would be 1 title under OECD definition. If Chinese republished 1 volume with new corrections, or under diffferent name, it would be an additional title.



Of course there were more editions of the Bible in the West, and therefore more titles: it is way more easy to change about 100 characters than to change 100k,
Chinese books were generally larger in print, because small book printing was not as efficient and would cost lots of time. European printing and mansucript production was quite the opposite and consisted of many smaller editions. This inflates # of titles really high.

Overall, not a good source of production comparisons: may be a good source of undoubted intellectual dominance of the West though.

Just to add: Yongle Dadian was comissioned and produced in the span of 5 years. It's amounted to 370 million Chinese characters and is somewhat equivalent to 6x Enciclopedia Britannica, which have been printed for 240 years. In this system Yongle Dadian would be 1 title, Enciclopedia Britannica 15 for every edition + few supplements and Global edition, for 14th and 15th editions there was a separate annual revision printed each year from 1929 to 2007, which would be counted as a separate title. So Britannica solo would be attributing ~115 titles, while Yongle Dadian would be 1 title.
This incredibly helpful. Thanks! I already suspected this. Maybe we shouldn't even be counting scrolls (卷 juan), but 冊 (ce) instead.

I think most of the comparative work is probably highly problematic since it so hard to make any comparisons if different categories are used.
 
I checked the
Charting the “Rise of the West”: Manuscripts and Printed Books in Europe, A Long-Term Perspective from the Sixth through Eighteenth Centuries by Buringh and Van Zanden. which is one of the sources for this work, and main source for comaparison between China and Europe. Numbers are just for "titles", not the books. They specificaly state they included manuscripts, separete volums of books, pamphelts, big works to fit the term "title". At the same time article does not provide real book amounts for China, using only "survived copies". Really no solid line to which this can be attributed. Works like a copy of Nongshu (136k words) is 1 title and Marc's Gospel (11k words) is 1 title, and a simple manuscript is 1 title. As example, Yongle dadain consisted of 22,937 scrolls, produced in 1408 would not be 11k works (= volumes), or 22937 scrolls, it would be 1 title under OECD definition. If Chinese republished 1 volume with new corrections, or under diffferent name, it would be an additional title.



Of course there were more editions of the Bible in the West, and therefore more titles: it is way more easy to change about 100 characters than to change 100k,
Chinese books were generally larger in print, because small book printing was not as efficient and would cost lots of time. European printing and mansucript production was quite the opposite and consisted of many smaller editions. This inflates # of titles really high.

Overall, not a good source of production comparisons: may be a good source of undoubted intellectual dominance of the West though.

Just to add: Yongle Dadian was comissioned and produced in the span of 5 years. It's amounted to 370 million Chinese characters and is somewhat equivalent to 6x Enciclopedia Britannica, which have been printed for 240 years. In this system Yongle Dadian would be 1 title, Enciclopedia Britannica 15 for every edition + few supplements and Global edition, for 14th and 15th editions there was a separate annual revision printed each year from 1929 to 2007, which would be counted as a separate title. So Britannica solo would be attributing ~115 titles, while Yongle Dadian would be 1 title.
This incredibly helpful. Thanks! I already suspected this. Maybe we shouldn't even be counting scrolls (卷 juan), but 冊 (ce) instead.

I think most of the comparative work is probably highly problematic since it so hard to make any comparisons if different categories are used.
The claim that China had more bulk production is 100% contradicted by this article which states in clear terms that it was the exact opposite:


This distinct difference in written Chinese and European languages led to aseries of differences pertaining to the printing technology. Because of the vastnumber of types needed, moveable-type printing means a tremendous capitalinvestment in making or purchasing types. The fact that moveable types can be re-used is an advantage in the long run, yet very few printers in pre-modern China could afford such a long-term investment, since most print shops operated ona small scale. The vast financial burdens that the use of moveable types posed onprinters is further enhanced through the process of typesetting and distributing.As Rudolf Hirsch and David McKitterick have cogently pointed out, setting thetype for one sheet in early modern Europe required a full day’s work on the partof a skilled compositor.15 New print runs would require the same initial investment in time and resources since each page of the whole text needed to be reset, alaborious and expensive work.16 After the runs were complete, the types neededto be redistributed into the cases where it was stored for future service, a worknot less easier or time-consuming than typesetting. Therefore, Shen Kua 沈括(1031–1095), one of the first practitioners of moveable-type printing in theworld, concluded that though using moveable types was marvelously quick forprinting hundreds or thousands copies, it would be neither simple nor easy ifonly two or three copies were to be printed.17 Understandably, these factorsposed further burdens on printers, making moveable types financially less practical and attractive to Chinese printers than to their European counterparts. Thisis perhaps also the reason why the majority of extant moveable-type printedworks in pre-modern China were produced by the Chinese government, which,unlike a private printer, was able to supply the large capital needed for the hugenumber of fonts and the laborious type-setting.

European printers overproduced books and they seemingly produced more titles, it's hard to see how you can derive the idea that there was any kind of parity from the existing sources, sure you can cast doubt and obfuscate a bit but as it stands it does seem that access to books was easier in Europe.

One thing that could be explored further is looking at the price of books relative to wages.
 
  • 1
Reactions:

If I read this correctly, this seems to be saying that cost-wise the Chinese printing industry was as cost effective as the European one, but it does also state clearly that the Chinese did produce and consume fewer books and accepts this as fact.

It also says that Chinese printing is more efficient at higher volumes, which I find weird to reconcile with the link I put above, so the Chinese had in theory a better bulk producer of books... but used it over moveable-type because it could produce low quantities better?
 
The claim that China had more bulk production is 100% contradicted by this article which states in clear terms that it was the exact opposite:


This distinct difference in written Chinese and European languages led to aseries of differences pertaining to the printing technology. Because of the vastnumber of types needed, moveable-type printing means a tremendous capitalinvestment in making or purchasing types. The fact that moveable types can be re-used is an advantage in the long run, yet very few printers in pre-modern China could afford such a long-term investment, since most print shops operated ona small scale. The vast financial burdens that the use of moveable types posed onprinters is further enhanced through the process of typesetting and distributing.As Rudolf Hirsch and David McKitterick have cogently pointed out, setting thetype for one sheet in early modern Europe required a full day’s work on the partof a skilled compositor.15 New print runs would require the same initial investment in time and resources since each page of the whole text needed to be reset, alaborious and expensive work.16 After the runs were complete, the types neededto be redistributed into the cases where it was stored for future service, a worknot less easier or time-consuming than typesetting. Therefore, Shen Kua 沈括(1031–1095), one of the first practitioners of moveable-type printing in theworld, concluded that though using moveable types was marvelously quick forprinting hundreds or thousands copies, it would be neither simple nor easy ifonly two or three copies were to be printed.17 Understandably, these factorsposed further burdens on printers, making moveable types financially less practical and attractive to Chinese printers than to their European counterparts. Thisis perhaps also the reason why the majority of extant moveable-type printedworks in pre-modern China were produced by the Chinese government, which,unlike a private printer, was able to supply the large capital needed for the hugenumber of fonts and the laborious type-setting.

European printers overproduced books and they seemingly produced more titles, it's hard to see how you can derive the idea that there was any kind of parity from the existing sources, sure you can cast doubt and obfuscate a bit but as it stands it does seem that access to books was easier in Europe.

One thing that could be explored further is looking at the price of books relative to wages.
I think you misunderstand Lin Hang's article. It makes a comparison between European and Chinese printing techniques and how these may have led to different social, cultural and economic outcomes. However there is not explicit comparison in volumes. On page 131: "Yet, due to the scarcity of data available, we cannot count how many copies of each edition were printed, nor are we able to identify how many rounds of reprint each title had." A return problem in researching this I have found is that we do not have good data on total production for China. None of the literature I have been surveying today and yesterday has been able to give me a number.

Now concerning the point of overproduction in European printing. As Lin points out on p.131 this was speculative overproduction. Because of the typesetting production method, speculative overproduction was the only viable market strategy. However, if inventory went unsold a printer would go bankrupt. Which constantly happened. Books to go unread do not transform society.
The Chinese block printing allowed much tighter control over production leading to no overproduction and less bankruptcies.

As a side note, the use of block printing would also explain why Chinese printers are producing a smaller range of texts. They can use preexisting printing blocks and they would only invest in new blocks if they think there would be demand. You also don't know how often an existing block set has been used. A European type set get scrambled after use. Conversely, there is nothing preventing a Chinese printer from using a century old block. As per McDermott in A Social History of the Chinese Book (p.46-7): "Moreover, by themselves these woodblock title figures do not prove the relative success of the imprint, since no corresponding chart exists to indicate a concurrent decline in the production and use of manuscripts."

Getting back to Lin Hang, their conclusion (p.145) does suggest that potentially the Printing Press ended up being more transformative in Europe, but not just due to its technical or orthographic aspects:

Printing in Europe was invented (or adopted) at a time when significant new religious and cultural movements were underway, including the Reformation, Renaissance humanism, and voyages of discovery. It is thus almost impossible to weigh the impact of printing independently of these events, as each of them emerged from a complex casual nexus. However, the introduction of Gutenberg’s revolution to Europe in the middle of the fifteenth century has generally been recognized as a major, if not the most important, turning point in the great transformation of European society from the medieval to the modern age.



The point for me is not whether or not China actually had more printed book than Europe (although that is how this conversation started). The point for me is that printing did change China. This happened during the late Ming (after 1500). This coincides with the time that printing transformed the face of Europe also.
Maybe maybe it was less revolutionary or transformative than in Europe. But it still was a big deal.

The game will be set in the Early Modern Period, in which Institutions will transform your states in the long term. In the Early Modern Period, Europe was transformed by the Gutenberg Printing Press and China was transformed by Block Printing. The transformations were different in quality, because they happened in different contexts. At the same time India, the Middle-East and Africa saw no wide spread adoption of printing and no such transformations.


I think that to play Project Caesar/EU5 in East-Asia and see the Printing Press institution coming online for Europeans while not getting a Block Printing equivalent would be very immersion breaking.
 
I think you misunderstand Lin Hang's article. It makes a comparison between European and Chinese printing techniques and how these may have led to different social, cultural and economic outcomes. However there is not explicit comparison in volumes. On page 131: "Yet, due to the scarcity of data available, we cannot count how many copies of each edition were printed, nor are we able to identify how many rounds of reprint each title had." A return problem in researching this I have found is that we do not have good data on total production for China. None of the literature I have been surveying today and yesterday has been able to give me a number.

Now concerning the point of overproduction in European printing. As Lin points out on p.131 this was speculative overproduction. Because of the typesetting production method, speculative overproduction was the only viable market strategy. However, if inventory went unsold a printer would go bankrupt. Which constantly happened. Books to go unread do not transform society.
The Chinese block printing allowed much tighter control over production leading to no overproduction and less bankruptcies.

As a side note, the use of block printing would also explain why Chinese printers are producing a smaller range of texts. They can use preexisting printing blocks and they would only invest in new blocks if they think there would be demand. You also don't know how often an existing block set has been used. A European type set get scrambled after use. Conversely, there is nothing preventing a Chinese printer from using a century old block. As per McDermott in A Social History of the Chinese Book (p.46-7): "Moreover, by themselves these woodblock title figures do not prove the relative success of the imprint, since no corresponding chart exists to indicate a concurrent decline in the production and use of manuscripts."

Getting back to Lin Hang, their conclusion (p.145) does suggest that potentially the Printing Press ended up being more transformative in Europe, but not just due to its technical or orthographic aspects:

Printing in Europe was invented (or adopted) at a time when significant new religious and cultural movements were underway, including the Reformation, Renaissance humanism, and voyages of discovery. It is thus almost impossible to weigh the impact of printing independently of these events, as each of them emerged from a complex casual nexus. However, the introduction of Gutenberg’s revolution to Europe in the middle of the fifteenth century has generally been recognized as a major, if not the most important, turning point in the great transformation of European society from the medieval to the modern age.



The point for me is not whether or not China actually had more printed book than Europe (although that is how this conversation started). The point for me is that printing did change China. This happened during the late Ming (after 1500). This coincides with the time that printing transformed the face of Europe also.
Maybe maybe it was less revolutionary or transformative than in Europe. But it still was a big deal.

The game will be set in the Early Modern Period, in which Institutions will transform your states in the long term. In the Early Modern Period, Europe was transformed by the Gutenberg Printing Press and China was transformed by Block Printing. The transformations were different in quality, because they happened in different contexts. At the same time India, the Middle-East and Africa saw no wide spread adoption of printing and no such transformations.


I think that to play Project Caesar/EU5 in East-Asia and see the Printing Press institution coming online for Europeans while not getting a Block Printing equivalent would be very immersion breaking.
The thing is we just have a single printing press institution, if printing lead to a 2(maybe 3?) magnitude increase of book production in Europe which was itself 1 magnitude higher than what China achieved, I'm not sure why China should be automatically getting that institution or even start with it.
Maybe it could be something tiered, to show that China and East Asia in general were producing and reading books much more than the rest of the world but Europe was even higher.
You could argue meritocracy being present only in China indirectly represents that
 
  • 1
Reactions:
I think you misunderstand Lin Hang's article. It makes a comparison between European and Chinese printing techniques and how these may have led to different social, cultural and economic outcomes. However there is not explicit comparison in volumes. On page 131: "Yet, due to the scarcity of data available, we cannot count how many copies of each edition were printed, nor are we able to identify how many rounds of reprint each title had." A return problem in researching this I have found is that we do not have good data on total production for China. None of the literature I have been surveying today and yesterday has been able to give me a number.

Now concerning the point of overproduction in European printing. As Lin points out on p.131 this was speculative overproduction. Because of the typesetting production method, speculative overproduction was the only viable market strategy. However, if inventory went unsold a printer would go bankrupt. Which constantly happened. Books to go unread do not transform society.
The Chinese block printing allowed much tighter control over production leading to no overproduction and less bankruptcies.

As a side note, the use of block printing would also explain why Chinese printers are producing a smaller range of texts. They can use preexisting printing blocks and they would only invest in new blocks if they think there would be demand. You also don't know how often an existing block set has been used. A European type set get scrambled after use. Conversely, there is nothing preventing a Chinese printer from using a century old block. As per McDermott in A Social History of the Chinese Book (p.46-7): "Moreover, by themselves these woodblock title figures do not prove the relative success of the imprint, since no corresponding chart exists to indicate a concurrent decline in the production and use of manuscripts."

Getting back to Lin Hang, their conclusion (p.145) does suggest that potentially the Printing Press ended up being more transformative in Europe, but not just due to its technical or orthographic aspects:

Printing in Europe was invented (or adopted) at a time when significant new religious and cultural movements were underway, including the Reformation, Renaissance humanism, and voyages of discovery. It is thus almost impossible to weigh the impact of printing independently of these events, as each of them emerged from a complex casual nexus. However, the introduction of Gutenberg’s revolution to Europe in the middle of the fifteenth century has generally been recognized as a major, if not the most important, turning point in the great transformation of European society from the medieval to the modern age.



The point for me is not whether or not China actually had more printed book than Europe (although that is how this conversation started). The point for me is that printing did change China. This happened during the late Ming (after 1500). This coincides with the time that printing transformed the face of Europe also.
Maybe maybe it was less revolutionary or transformative than in Europe. But it still was a big deal.

The game will be set in the Early Modern Period, in which Institutions will transform your states in the long term. In the Early Modern Period, Europe was transformed by the Gutenberg Printing Press and China was transformed by Block Printing. The transformations were different in quality, because they happened in different contexts. At the same time India, the Middle-East and Africa saw no wide spread adoption of printing and no such transformations.


I think that to play Project Caesar/EU5 in East-Asia and see the Printing Press institution coming online for Europeans while not getting a Block Printing equivalent would be very immersion breaking.
Intriguing... so you could make the argument that the "printing revolution" institution only makes sense to originate in a place with both some flavor of printing press technology, and some sort of renaissance institution? And that China could arguably be included if we consider Wang Yangming's approach to Neo-Confucianism as a sort of "Confucianism Renaissance" that would qualify?

I'm totally not mining these discussions for mod ideas. No, no, not at all.
 
The thing is we just have a single printing press institution, if printing lead to a 2(maybe 3?) magnitude increase of book production in Europe which was itself 1 magnitude higher than what China achieved, I'm not sure why China should be automatically getting that institution or even start with it.
Maybe it could be something tiered, to show that China and East Asia in general were producing and reading books much more than the rest of the world but Europe was even higher.
You could argue meritocracy being present only in China indirectly represents that

I would prefer to see two mutually exclusive instances of the institution Printing. Printing A: Gutenberg Printing Press. Printing B: Chinese Block Printing. With different (but somehow similar?) modifiers, or however institutions work. East Asian societies didn't adopt any Western printing tech till the 19th century anyway (and then they adopted lithography which is more similar to block printing).

Alternatively if we can have only 1 Printing Institution then yes I would give Europe and East-Asia the same thing. Because, reading the Printing Press as the European Gutenberg tech with moveable type is just a narrow reading of printing technology. Block printing is similar enough. Printing is printing.

Intriguing... so you could make the argument that the "printing revolution" institution only makes sense to originate in a place with both some flavor of printing press technology, and some sort of renaissance institution? And that China could arguably be included if we consider Wang Yangming's approach to Neo-Confucianism as a sort of "Confucianism Renaissance" that would qualify?

I am not sure how much we should project the Renaissance to China. I'm pretty down on the Renaissance anyway. For me some of the more important differences are the Reformation and the Decentralization of Europe. I don't think anyone was printing as subversive and inflammatory texts like those of Martin Luther. Also in Europe, if you couldn't print something in France because of political reasons, you would print it in the Netherlands.

If you have a subversive text and your Chinese printer doesn't dare printing it. Where do you go? The printers in Beijing, Hangzhou and Fuzhou have the same restraints. Korea, Japan & Vietnam imported books from China, not the other way around. (edit: plus the Korean & Vietnamese governments also have zero interested in annoying the Chinese government in such a way.) Now there actually wasn't any direct state censorship of commercial printers, but there still could have been consequences to a rogue publishing. That is if printers were interested in those things in the first place, which I think they weren't.

edit: thinking about the above paragraph a bit. There was probably way more censorship of the press in Europe by state and church than in China.

I'm totally not mining these discussions for mod ideas. No, no, not at all.
Yeah, same. Part of me hopes that all my critiques of Eurocentrism go ignored. (Which I am sure they will be). So I can make a World History Institutions & Ages for EU5 also.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, I think that while China had a lot of benefit from the printing press technologies that they had, that there wasn't really any sort of equivalent "printing revolution", and my quite-a-stretch attempt at finding an equivalent Renaissance sort of thing doesn't really work.
 
Yeah, I think that while China had a lot of benefit from the printing press technologies that they had, that there wasn't really any sort of equivalent "printing revolution", and my quite-a-stretch attempt at finding an equivalent Renaissance sort of thing doesn't really work.


Eh, early modern period sees a significant boom in literacy. Both Victoria and EU significantly underestimate early modern Chinese technical prowess and development. The literacy rates in V2 are pretty comical and tend to be that way in a lot of areas of the world where colonial data obfuscates literacy collapses due to colonial policy and impoverishment.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:

Eh, early modern period sees a significant boom in literacy. Both Victoria and EU significantly underestimate early modern Chinese technical prowess and development. The literacy rates in V2 are pretty comical and tend to be that way in a lot of areas of the world where colonial data obfuscates literacy collapses due to colonial policy and impoverishment.
I don't mean it with regards to literacy but with regards to that sort of "obsession" for printing damn well near anything and everything if able.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Printing Press ≠ Casual Literacy

To me, the Printing Press Institution strikes more as an advent of the "Mass Media" thing, which happened through printing media in Europe.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
The claim that China had more bulk production is 100% contradicted by this article which states in clear terms that it was the exact opposite:

European printers overproduced books and they seemingly produced more titles, it's hard to see how you can derive the idea that there was any kind of parity from the existing sources, sure you can cast doubt and obfuscate a bit but as it stands it does seem that access to books was easier in Europe.
It is not contradicted by that, Source Method is simply counting title production as it was said before. No book production was compared, since it is impossible to count it.
To correct you on the basis of production though:
The number of booksprinted in Europe may impress historians of the Chinese book, as about 80,000new books were printed in Europe from 1501 to 1550, and over 620,000 from1751 to 1800. But we need to bear in mind that in most cases there was a considerable speculative overproduction, so that it is not impossible that in earlymodern Europe, as one historian of the book has wisely argued, “most have neverbeen read” (Amory 1996)
In the source it is specified there are no correct book production numbers, it is rather comparing overall title production (which indicates not a book production, but intellectual spread and agressive business models). Need to make a note: for China survived book titles are used in single form even after reprinting, and surviving estimates are used rather than catalogues.
In fact, of the quarter of a million titles of Chinese publications known to have
accumulated throughout the dynasties, no less than one half were produced during
this period, the greatest amount in all history.
by Tsieng, 1/4 million titles is not even identical to the estimates from your source for all publications, which is another argument against the Source, since 1) they used specific titles, not specific works (which is impossible to count), 2) ignored catalogues from China and used catalogues for Europe, 3) used wrong methodology

And here is a story for just TWO titles:
As for religious works, at least three and perhaps four editions of the Buddhist
Tripitaka and one edition of the Taoist canons were printed under the Ming. The
most famous of these is the southern edition of the Tripitaka, Nan Tsang,6 including
1610 works in 6331 chiian, printed in Nanking in 1372, and the northern edition, Pei
Tsang 7, including 1615 works in 6361 chiian, produced in Peking in 1401.
This would mean one title production just 100 years ago from the first class in the table (1501-1550) in 1 class (1350-1401) overproduced (3225 vs 2850) books from 1501-1550, which is an unreasonable claim.
To compare some Printing centers in China with Antwerp:
Between 1481 and 1520, the number of printing shops continued to grow, reaching a peak around 1510 when the city had more than ten active printing shops.
By 1520, book production in Antwerp had reached close to 800 titles with a total volume of some 11,000 sheets
If we look simply at numbers of shufang alone, as calculated by Zhang Xiumin,Nanjing ranked at the forefront of production, with ninety-three shops. Jianyang hadeighty-four shops, and Suzhou thirty-seven (thirty-eight, if we count Mao Jin’s 毛晉Jigu ge 及古閣, in Changshu, Suzhou prefecture), Hangzhou twenty-four, and Huizhouten. Of course, numbers of shufang serve as only a crude indicator of publishing importance, since they do not reveal volume of output or significance in the market. ButZhang’s rough estimate of volume of production by commercial publishers approximates this general ranking of numbers of shufang;
see Zhongguo yinshua shi, pp. 343–48,359–60, 365–66, 369–72, 378–83, 400–401, and 550–51.
Some pre-modern printing volumes of Tan period:
From 658 to 663, Xuanzang printed one million copies of the image of Puxian Pusa to distribute to Buddhist devotees
If this figure would mean titles it would be just ONE pamphlet, meaning one title. In the work you used as a source, pamphlets are counted as one title and are comapred with other book production.

I just found source explaining why xylography was more popular than movable type despite movable type being present in China.
Unlike plates of set type, woodblocks did not requirenew investment once they were carved and they, if properly preserved and repaired, could be used over and over again to produce up to 40,000 copies.
You can check some secondary sources: If Gutenberg's press was so good and Chinese printing industry was so pathetic, Jesuits would have worked with former and establish their dominance over later. However, they found for themself Chinese printing technology suits Asian markets and started using it en mass
Missionaries,
such as Matteo Ricci (1552–1610), were positively surprised by the presence of
this widespread, efficient, and cheap printing industry. Ricci, for his part, was
well aware of the fact that ‘[the Chinese] printing is much older than ours,
since they have had it since more than five hundred years’.2 Ricci’s editor,
Nicolas Trigault (1577–1628), further elaborated this point: ‘From this convenience
comes forth the multitude and cheapness of so many Chinese books,
which is not easy to explain to those who have not seen it’.3 One of their successors,
Alvaro Semedo (1585 or 1586–1658), noticed that the printing offices in the
Fujian province ‘are so many, that they make any city look like Antwerp’, which
was at that moment one of the major printing places in Europe.
This process was facilitated by specific characteristics of Chinese printing,
related to both the printing techniques and the absence of pre-printing censorship.
Simply stated, unlike the European complex and costly machinery of
the moveable-type printing press, China usually preferred to use the simpler
and cheaper techniques of xylography.7 Ricci noticed the difference in printing
technique – woodblock printing in China versus the movable type printing
press in Europe – and pointed at the advantage of the Chinese method,
especially regarding its economic benefits: ‘And in their way there is a great
convenience, which is to keep the woodblocks complete, and to be able to print
them little by little according to what you want, and even to amend what you
want after three and four or more years, because it is easy to change a word and
also many lines altogether while mending the woodblock’.8 Trigault likewise
praises this technology: ‘Therefore, the way of this typography is so easy that,
after having seen it once, one dares to undertake it oneself’.9 Consequently,
encouraged by their Chinese counterparts, missionaries immediately adopted
xylography for the printing of their texts.
Europeans did not have to import a printing press, and
they were not necessarily dependent on commercial printers to publish their
works. From the beginning, they reported that just like the jiake, they printed
‘at home’ (in nostra casa) with domestic help.
It is said that a skilled printer could produce as many as 1500 or 2000 double sheets in a day. Blocks can be stored and reused when extra copies are needed. 15,000 prints can be taken from a block with a further 10,000 after touching up.
by Tsien

And the reason why moving types were not among the most popular in China.
This system worked well when the run was large. Wang Zhen's initial project to produce 100 copies of a 60,000 character gazetteer of the local district was produced in less than a month. But for the smaller runs typical of the time it was not such an improvement. A reprint required resetting and re-proofreading, unlike the wooden block system where it was feasible to store the blocks and reuse them. Individual wooden characters didn't last as long as complete blocks.
by Tsien

Introduction: The Production and Distribution
of Sino-European Intercultural Books in China
(1582–c.1823)
Nicolas Standaert

Pan, Jixing (1997). "On the Origin of Printing in the Light of New Archaeological Discoveries"
Wilkinson, Endymion (2012), Chinese History: A New Manual

Introduction: The Sibao Book
Trade and Qing Society

Science and Civilisation in China Volume 5, Chemistry and Chemical Technology Part 1, Paper and Printing by Tsien Tsuen-Hsuin
 
I'm not a fan of a fact that Seville gets an institution in the Age of Discovery (1444-1505 in eu4) and Lisbon gets an institution at the Age of Reformation (1505-1610 in eu4) because Portugal peaked during the Age of Discovery (particularly under the reign of Manuel I 1495-1521) and was already in steep decline halfway through the Age of Reformation, while Castile peaked in the Age of Reformation, particularly under the reign of Philip II: (1556–1598).

It would be more balanced periodically-wise, that Lisbon would unlock the institution for having discovered the Azores and the West African coast during the Age of Discovery (Around 1460-1475) which would give them the edge to peak during 1495-1521. Perhaps rename "New World" to "High Seas Exploration". And then Seville would get the institution during the Age of Reformation, which could remain Global Trade or be renamed to "Colonialism" or something that represents the height of Spanish conquests of the Aztec and Inca empires between 1519-35 (or the the first circumnavigation in 1522), so that Castile would get it's edge to peak at 1556-1598.
 
Last edited:
  • 2Like
Reactions:
It is not contradicted by that, Source Method is simply counting title production as it was said before. No book production was compared, since it is impossible to count it.
To correct you on the basis of production though:

In the source it is specified there are no correct book production numbers, it is rather comparing overall title production (which indicates not a book production, but intellectual spread and agressive business models). Need to make a note: for China survived book titles are used in single form even after reprinting, and surviving estimates are used rather than catalogues.

by Tsieng, 1/4 million titles is not even identical to the estimates from your source for all publications, which is another argument against the Source, since 1) they used specific titles, not specific works (which is impossible to count), 2) ignored catalogues from China and used catalogues for Europe, 3) used wrong methodology

And here is a story for just TWO titles:

This would mean one title production just 100 years ago from the first class in the table (1501-1550) in 1 class (1350-1401) overproduced (3225 vs 2850) books from 1501-1550, which is an unreasonable claim.
To compare some Printing centers in China with Antwerp:


Some pre-modern printing volumes of Tan period:

If this figure would mean titles it would be just ONE pamphlet, meaning one title. In the work you used as a source, pamphlets are counted as one title and are comapred with other book production.

I just found source explaining why xylography was more popular than movable type despite movable type being present in China.

You can check some secondary sources: If Gutenberg's press was so good and Chinese printing industry was so pathetic, Jesuits would have worked with former and establish their dominance over later. However, they found for themself Chinese printing technology suits Asian markets and started using it en mass




by Tsien

And the reason why moving types were not among the most popular in China.

by Tsien

Introduction: The Production and Distribution
of Sino-European Intercultural Books in China
(1582–c.1823)
Nicolas Standaert

Pan, Jixing (1997). "On the Origin of Printing in the Light of New Archaeological Discoveries"
Wilkinson, Endymion (2012), Chinese History: A New Manual

Introduction: The Sibao Book
Trade and Qing Society

Science and Civilisation in China Volume 5, Chemistry and Chemical Technology Part 1, Paper and Printing by Tsien Tsuen-Hsuin
Look I honestly I'm tired of your meaningless obfuscation, if you think you know more than these scholars then go argue with them in the appropriate platform, I have no intention to get with meaningless arguments with someone like you, if actual scholars feel like the estimate is appropriate and MULTIPLE sources that even defend the efficacy of Chinese printing agree with the fact that European printing production and variety was higher, I have zero reason to debate this further.
You are also arguing with a strawman, as I have myself talked about the fact that Chinese printing might have had parity with European printing so have fun.
 
Last edited:
  • 1
Reactions:
Look I honestly I'm tired of your meaningless obfuscation, if you think you know more than these scholars then go argue with them in the appropriate platform, I have no intention to get with meaningless arguments with someone like you, if actual scholars feel like the estimate is appropriate and MULTIPLE sources that even defend the efficacy of Chinese printing agree with the fact that European printing production and variety was higher, I have zero reason to debate this further.
You are also arguing with a strawman so have fun.
Idk why you exploded, I used many sourced to contradict MUH SCHOLARS who analyzed already existant information from another study (they use it as a source), where all my claims are present and were they specifically use Methodology, which I find contradicting your thesis. I think you were became so locked in trying to proove China was outdated or something that you became emotionaly invested and started to ignore presented facts. I used multiple sources, you used few sources: your sources methodology is not good and not consistant (for statistics), while other source points out "those are just titles, we do not know volumes produced"; Chinese guy also pointed out you were not using your sources correctly. Just read information better next time and do not rely on scholarship authority; it is a really narrow topic, where using and relying on ONE statistics is a bad idea, which is also proven by the fact they count not individual books produced and ignored the Chinese specifics, used only survived works for China and their statistics does not even equate to total amount of surviving Chinese titles in print in the same era. Titles produced are a metter of intellectual and economical dominance of the west, they do not represent production values, as I gave you one example of production from 2 editions of the same book right after "Chineese dark ages" in 2 years (1372 an 1401) in 2 different places (Peking and Nanjing) already accounted for 3200 works, which is more than presented in the table for 1501-1550, and does not even cover the timeframe (1350-1371,1373-1401), other printing centers, and individual printing activities. Here, it just destroyed whole your source Statistics with one simple example. You can not say "China was outperformed in book production volumes", because we do not have any reliable statistics for that matter, and even your source mentioned exactly that. I hope next time you would actually read presented information, I am spending time carefully analyzing and presenting it in a right order overall, and hope person I am discussing it with would do exactly the same.
 
  • 3
  • 1
Reactions:
Idk why you exploded, I used many sourced to contradict MUH SCHOLARS who analyzed already existant information from another study (they use it as a source), where all my claims are present and were they specifically use Methodology, which I find contradicting your thesis. I think you were became so locked in trying to proove China was outdated or something that you became emotionaly invested and started to ignore presented facts. I used multiple sources, you used few sources: your sources methodology is not good and not consistant (for statistics), while other source points out "those are just titles, we do not know volumes produced"; Chinese guy also pointed out you were not using your sources correctly. Just read information better next time and do not rely on scholarship authority; it is a really narrow topic, where using and relying on ONE statistics is a bad idea, which is also proven by the fact they count not individual books produced and ignored the Chinese specifics, used only survived works for China and their statistics does not even equate to total amount of surviving Chinese titles in print in the same era. Titles produced are a metter of intellectual and economical dominance of the west, they do not represent production values, as I gave you one example of production from 2 editions of the same book right after "Chineese dark ages" in 2 years (1372 an 1401) in 2 different places (Peking and Nanjing) already accounted for 3200 works, which is more than presented in the table for 1501-1550, and does not even cover the timeframe (1350-1371,1373-1401), other printing centers, and individual printing activities. Here, it just destroyed whole your source Statistics with one simple example. You can not say "China was outperformed in book production volumes", because we do not have any reliable statistics for that matter, and even your source mentioned exactly that. I hope next time you would actually read presented information, I am spending time carefully analyzing and presenting it in a right order overall, and hope person I am discussing it with would do exactly the same.
Very cool, publish a paper then
 
  • 2
  • 1Like
Reactions: