Printing initially amplified medieval texts rather than new knowledge
Evidence
It is one of the striking paradoxes in the history of Western culture that the invention of printing had at first an archaicizing effect, as neglected medieval texts were given a much wider circulation than they had achieved when they were first written. (The first books that Caxton printed did not deal with new technology or the latest literary fashions, but were mostly medieval chivalric treatises.) — Robert Irwin, For Lust of Knowing, 132
Categorization
- CANDY: A neat counterintuitive fact: the printing revolution first worked backwards, circulating old chivalric texts rather than novel ideas.
- XREF: connects to: Medieval writers copied well-phrased passages as reusable tools rather than seeking originality
Related
- Medieval writers copied well-phrased passages as reusable tools rather than seeking originality (similarity 0.84)
- Printing emphasized vernacular languages and divided the European intellectual mind (similarity 0.83)
- Printing did not immediately collapse manuscript culture (similarity 0.83)
- Print did not immediately collapse manuscript book production (similarity 0.82)
- Latin lost its printing hegemony within a century of 1500 (similarity 0.80)
- Manuscript collectors assembled bespoke texts, a freedom print abolished (similarity 0.79)
- Writing and printing first served state administration, not literature (similarity 0.79)
- Manuscript-era readers could compile bespoke texts; print ended that autonomy. (similarity 0.79)
- Luther exploited the printing press with short vernacular pamphlets (similarity 0.79)
- Medieval authors could innovate while citing only established authorities (similarity 0.78)
- Print’s abundance made destroyed libraries swiftly replaceable (similarity 0.78)