His association with Fust, the business man, and Schoeffer, the craftsman, was the means whereby the invention became profitable to the world, though not to Gutenberg. There is no reason to suppose that Fust was an unprincipled schemer who stole Gutenberg’s invention and profited by it. He was a business man who made a contract with another man for the carrying on of a certain manufacturing process, setting his capital against the other man’s labor for an equal share in the profit. There was not only no profit, but the working partner did not live up to his side of the contract. Fust sued, obtained a judgment, and under this judgment took over a great part at least of the equipment which his money had paid for. While the criminal procedure of this age was of a very harsh and primitive sort the judgments of the German courts in civil cases appear generally to have been fairly just. When we consider Gutenberg’s record of financial slipperiness there seems no reason to doubt that it was just in this case. On obtaining the business Fust associated with himself the young journeyman, Peter Schoeffer, who had learned the business in the Gutenberg and Fust establishment and had married Fust’s daughter. He was an excellent workman and his skill, backed by Fust’s capital, set the new invention on a practical basis and insured its future.
In deciding against the claims of Gutenberg to the invention we by no means deprive him of all share in the glory. The reinvention with improvements was nearly if not quite as creditable a task as the invention, especially when we remember how simple a step the actual inventor took in going from his block book to his type-set book. The invention of Coster was sterile. The reinvention of Gutenberg was fruitful. It was Mainz and not Haarlem which actually gave printing to the world.
In view of all this the early testimonies are not so conflicting as they seem. We have seen that the testimonies of Junius and of Zell supplement each other. We can see that the early authorities were right in their claim that printing was given to Germany and the world by Mainz, and at the same time that the claim is not, as has been hastily supposed, a claim that it was invented there. We can see that the reinvention of printing might well seem so important to Gutenberg himself and to his family that they should claim that he invented it. The statement in the letters patent may well refer to the service which Gutenberg rendered to the court and bishopric of Adolph II by the introduction of typography because he unquestionably did thus render them great service, and we are no longer surprised at the omission of a distinct statement that Gutenberg was rewarded for inventing typography. In a word, the Gutenberg monuments need not come down, but the inscriptions on them should be changed.
CHAPTER V
Materials and Methods of the First Printers
Our knowledge of Coster is much less complete than our knowledge of Gutenberg. Much, however, that could be said of one would undoubtedly be true of the other. It is reported that Coster began with wooden type. This would naturally be the first step forward from the block book, which was invariably printed from wood. Finding that wooden type was unsatisfactory in the press, he experimented with lead and with tin, we are told. Obviously he would not get satisfactory results with either of these metals unalloyed. The use of unsatisfactory material probably accounts for the number of fonts of type which he employed in his comparatively small output.
Showing Principle of a Type Mold
Gutenberg and his associates invented a more satisfactory type metal and an improved method for the making of type. The first types appear to have been carved individually by hand. This was a great task, but not as great as might appear. The early printers printed their books page by page. When one page was printed in sufficient numbers for the edition the type was distributed and another page set up, and so on. In this way a comparatively small amount of type would suffice for the equipment of a small shop. It was not long, however, before the superiority of casting was perceived.
The first mold was probably two notched blocks of brass or copper, like those shown in the accompanying illustration, a method being provided of accurately positioning the matrix under the opening in the mold and also of holding the two blocks firmly together. From the illustration it will be noted that when the blocks are forced together a square opening remains. Still keeping the blocks together, but sliding down the one at the right, one dimension of the opening does not change, but the other can be varied. This mold has been improved in detail, but not greatly altered in principle down to this day. A fairly satisfactory form of matrix very similar to the one in use today was soon devised. This was made by cutting the letter in relief on the end of a soft steel or iron punch which was then hardened and driven into a block of soft brass or copper, which became the matrix.
