Languish.org

General Category => Off the Record => Topic started by: Alatriste on October 16, 2009, 04:46:59 AM

Title: Paper or Ink?
Post by: Alatriste on October 16, 2009, 04:46:59 AM
Yesterday I was playing a bit with Civ IV and suddenly I had an idea: the invention of paper is usually considered a great breakthrough, one of the biggest advances of the Egyptian and Chinese civilizations, but... what about ink?

Even if you have no paper ink is very useful, and you can write with it on other materials than paper. But paper without ink is useful almost exclusively for flying kites... and dull indeed would those kites be without ink!
Title: Re: Paper or Ink?
Post by: Viking on October 16, 2009, 04:54:05 AM
Squid or Cuttlefish ink was used for writing before the invention of synthetic ink.
Title: Re: Paper or Ink?
Post by: Jaron on October 16, 2009, 04:59:42 AM
Owned.
Title: Re: Paper or Ink?
Post by: Monoriu on October 16, 2009, 05:03:57 AM
Quote from: Alatriste on October 16, 2009, 04:46:59 AM
Yesterday I was playing a bit with Civ IV and suddenly I had an idea: the invention of paper is usually considered a great breakthrough, one of the biggest advances of the Egyptian and Chinese civilizations, but... what about ink?

Even if you have no paper ink is very useful, and you can write with it on other materials than paper. But paper without ink is useful almost exclusively for flying kites... and dull indeed would those kites be without ink!

Well, even without ink you can sorta write using paper.  As long as you have a knife, you can sorta cut out different shapes, representing words and such.
Title: Re: Paper or Ink?
Post by: Alatriste on October 16, 2009, 05:39:12 AM
Quote from: Viking on October 16, 2009, 04:54:05 AM
Squid or Cuttlefish ink was used for writing before the invention of synthetic ink.

That's not so easy... making ink is quite more complex than catching some squids and squeezing them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ink

But anyway my question is: Aren't we wrong when we assign far more importance to the invention of paper? Ink predates paper (a quick Wiki search gives an astounding number of years between ink - 12th century BC - and paper - 2th century CE - both in China) and it's at the very least equally important.
Title: Re: Paper or Ink?
Post by: Monoriu on October 16, 2009, 05:44:42 AM
I think paper is the greater limitation of the two.  As you found, ink was invented much earlier than paper.  So paper was the limiting factor that prevented writing on a large scale. 

I also think that there are a great variety of substances that can serve the purpose of ink.  Not so for paper.  As a last resort, you can always write with your blood  :bleeding:
Title: Re: Paper or Ink?
Post by: Viking on October 16, 2009, 05:57:34 AM
Quote from: Alatriste on October 16, 2009, 05:39:12 AM
Quote from: Viking on October 16, 2009, 04:54:05 AM
Squid or Cuttlefish ink was used for writing before the invention of synthetic ink.

That's not so easy... making ink is quite more complex than catching some squids and squeezing them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ink

But anyway my question is: Aren't we wrong when we assign far more importance to the invention of paper? Ink predates paper (a quick Wiki search gives an astounding number of years between ink - 12th century BC - and paper - 2th century CE - both in China) and it's at the very least equally important.

http://www.instructables.com/id/How-to-Harvest-Squid-Ink/

A medium for writing is probably much older as we see from cave painting. Body, cave and wall art were all coloured and painted on. So Ink equivalents probably predated paper by thousands of years.

But still, squid ink was harvested and used for writing.
Title: Re: Paper or Ink?
Post by: Brazen on October 16, 2009, 06:00:04 AM
The Atlanteans used squid ink directly from specially trained squid then passed their arcane knowledge on to our ancestors.
Title: Re: Paper or Ink?
Post by: Josquius on October 16, 2009, 07:01:45 AM
There are all sorts of ink substitutes as Mono mentioned.
For how long have people being dying clothes? Eons... And yeah, cave paintings.

Civ is a game, it  goes for the coolness factor. Who cares that apparently mundane invention was actually a big world changer, it just doesn't look so cool as gunpowder or construction (wtf?).
Title: Re: Paper or Ink?
Post by: Malthus on October 16, 2009, 09:39:40 AM
Pigments for painting or dyeing were probably one of the earliest investions.
Title: Re: Paper or Ink?
Post by: Josephus on October 16, 2009, 09:43:09 AM
Civ IV was probably not meant to inititiate deep historical discussions.

Unlike, say, EU2 :lol:
Title: Re: Paper or Ink?
Post by: DontSayBanana on October 16, 2009, 09:50:39 AM
Pigment markings > paper.  Paper made records portable, but pigmentation allowed easier recording in more places.
Title: Re: Paper or Ink?
Post by: Malthus on October 16, 2009, 10:19:44 AM
From a "Civ" perspective, it makes no sense to have "pigments" as a tech, because they certainly predate any organized civilization by a considerable degree.

It would be like having "invent fire" or "stone tools" as a tech.
Title: Re: Paper or Ink?
Post by: Ed Anger on October 16, 2009, 10:24:42 AM
While you are inventing "ink", my chariot horde is raping your cities.
Title: Re: Paper or Ink?
Post by: DontSayBanana on October 16, 2009, 10:36:38 AM
I was talking about from a RL history standpoint, BTW- I've never actually played any of the Civ games.
Title: Re: Paper or Ink?
Post by: Grey Fox on October 16, 2009, 11:05:36 AM
You should.
Title: Re: Paper or Ink?
Post by: Eddie Teach on October 16, 2009, 12:17:00 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on October 16, 2009, 10:24:42 AM
While you are inventing "ink", my chariot horde is raping your cities.

More like, your chariot horde is getting pwned by my pikemen.  :P
Title: Re: Paper or Ink?
Post by: Caliga on October 16, 2009, 12:20:22 PM
 :huh: You do not need ink in order to write.  The Romans were in the habit of writing on wax tablets with a stylus and then rubbing out mistakes/changes when needed.
Title: Re: Paper or Ink?
Post by: Malthus on October 16, 2009, 12:20:46 PM
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on October 16, 2009, 12:17:00 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on October 16, 2009, 10:24:42 AM
While you are inventing "ink", my chariot horde is raping your cities.

More like, your chariot horde is getting pwned by my pikemen.  :P

" ... mustered by the mighty power of indentures written in INK!"

  ;)
Title: Re: Paper or Ink?
Post by: Malthus on October 16, 2009, 12:22:09 PM
Quote from: Caliga on October 16, 2009, 12:20:22 PM
:huh: You do not need ink in order to write.  The Romans were in the habit of writing on wax tablets with a stylus and then rubbing out mistakes/changes when needed.

That isn't all they did, however. Romans most certainly wrote letters in ink - there was a large find of these, well preserved, up by Hadrian's Wall.
Title: Re: Paper or Ink?
Post by: Caliga on October 16, 2009, 12:27:27 PM
Quote from: Malthus on October 16, 2009, 12:22:09 PM
That isn't all they did, however. Romans most certainly wrote letters in ink - there was a large find of these, well preserved, up by Hadrian's Wall.
Oh, I know.  I think they used the wax tablets as like scratch pads.  But my point is that they still could have been capable of writing had they not had access to ink.
Title: Re: Paper or Ink?
Post by: BuddhaRhubarb on October 16, 2009, 12:34:48 PM
Quote from: Viking on October 16, 2009, 04:54:05 AM
Squid or Cuttlefish ink was used for writing before the invention of synthetic ink.

I have this image in my head now of Shakespeare holding a squid over his pages and squeezing it in iambic pentameter.
Title: Re: Paper or Ink?
Post by: Malthus on October 16, 2009, 01:03:28 PM
Quote from: Caliga on October 16, 2009, 12:27:27 PM
Quote from: Malthus on October 16, 2009, 12:22:09 PM
That isn't all they did, however. Romans most certainly wrote letters in ink - there was a large find of these, well preserved, up by Hadrian's Wall.
Oh, I know.  I think they used the wax tablets as like scratch pads.  But my point is that they still could have been capable of writing had they not had access to ink.

Well, certainly; even earlier, there were clay tablets with writing. Same idea only permanent.  ;)

The earliest use of inks was certainly not for writing BTW, but for body-painting, tatooing and decorating walls (and presumably fabrics).