Re: Typefaces influenced by lettering on maps

Conrad,

> And if it is so obvious as
> to appear almost insulting,
> I apologise.

No, no, this is good.

As far as I'm concerned, it's important to revisit "the obvious" on a
regular basis! ;-)

> However, when I look at
> the bill of indenture that
> you offered us for
> inspection, I would say
> that the flourishes are
> an engraver's fancy, and I
> cannot conceive of a pen
> which could produce
> lettering like that.  The
> bodies of the letters carry
> the kind of diagonal
> emphasis which requires a
> chisel-cut nib, but the
> flourishes require a
> flexible pointed nib,
> probably one made of steel.

You raise all sorts of interesting issues here, most of which I can't
yet answer. <bg>

I, too, have wondered just how much the engraver altered the original
specimens of the writing-master....

E.g., I'm especially curious if the writing-master John Davies of
Hereford -- who wrote the verses for Smith's portrait which were added
to John Smith's map of New England -- himself penned the original
script engraved on the map, or if the hand given there originates with
the map's engraver, Simon van de Passe.

(I have a small digital reproduction of Davies' verses at the bottom
of my page giving an In Brief biography of Smith:

http://www.she-philosopher.com/ib/bios/smith.html

if any of you want to see for yourself. I shall eventually move this
pic into its own gallery exhibit, juxtaposed with writing samples from
Davies' copy-book, _The Writing Schoolmaster, or, The Anatomy of Fair
Writing_ (earliest surviving edition, 1631), but it will be at this
location for a while yet.)

John Davies of Hereford was described by Thomas Fuller in his 1662
_Worthies of England_ as "the greatest master of the pen that England
in her age beheld", so one would think that he would have drawn up the
verses himself ... but I really don't know yet whose hand -- or
combination of hands/technologies -- we're looking at here!

Also, there's another wrinkle to your question given that some
writing-masters, such as Edward Cocker, engraved their own specimens.
How/if that affected the original script is more than my untutored
eyes can see. I do know, though, that in keeping with the (some would
say inflated ;-) esteem in which he (and the culture in general, for
that matter) held his calligraphic art, Cocker worked in other media
besides copper. Cocker's _England's Penman_ (1668)

	"was printed from plates of brass engraved by the ingenious
	author. In 1672 he surpassed himself by engraving a book of
	twenty-six plates on silver."

(I'll try to post some facsimiles of specimens from Davies' and
Cocker's copy-books in the next couple of days.)

Also of special interest to me, are the specimen-books of Mercator and
Hondius, which I've not yet seen:

	"There was, indeed, a reaction against the over-elaboration of
	scripts elsewhere than in France. The Dutch school, important
	from the very first under the leadership of the great
	Mercator,[*] wrote roman and italic with sobriety, keeping the
	flourishes for text and secretary. Hondius, who succeeded to
	Mercator's business, also occupied himself as much with
	cartography as with calligraphy,[**] and practised both with
	mastery. His ten years' residence in England (1583-93) made
	him an important link between the schools of London and
	Antwerp, Rotterdam, etc., and his _Theatrum Artis Scribendi_
	(Antwerp, 1594) contains pieces by Bales and Martin from
	England and by Velde from Holland."

	NOTE *: "Cf. Denucé and Morison, _The Writing Book of Gerard
	Mercator_ (Paris, 1930), for facsimiles."

	NOTE **: "His splendid map of the world has been reproduced by
	Edward Heawood of the Royal Geographical Society (Amsterd.,
	1608; London, 1927)."

(Note to Karel, if you're out there reading this: have you seen, or do
you have access to, Hondius' _Theatrum Artis Scribendi_?)

The above quote is from a quite wonderful essay by Stanley Morison,
"The Development of Handwriting: An Outline" (1931), which I just
finished reading and only half-understood, largely because of
Morison's detailed discussion of calligraphic "flourishes" and
"sprig'd letters" and "striking" and "after touches" etc. I expect
Morison explains (certainly better than I can!) issues related to
shifting diagonals which others more schooled in this sort of thing
than am I would better understand.

Here's Morison's summary statement on the early-modern evolution of
European scripts:

	"The difference between the late Italian sixteenth and the
	early seventeenth century French and Dutch hands was mainly a
	matter of width of letter. The Italians condensed their letter
	and preserved, to some extent, their habit of angularising it
	(Arrighi's own letter, it will be remembered, was consistently
	'angled'), while the Dutch widened and rounded it. What French
	masters like Materot, Dutchmen like Perlingh, and English
	writers like Clark called the Italic or 'Italian' hand is a
	free flowing and obviously inclined hand in which the
	ascenders are looped and the majuscules entirely cursive --
	wholly different from the chancery of Arrighi and more
	flexible than the genuine Italian hand which it claimed to
	represent. This greater currency was due in part to the
	supposed preference of 'the ladies' for a more elegant script
	than the original chancery, and partly to the fact that a
	script whose purpose is 'polite' inevitably absorbs decorative
	features inconsistent with diplomatic, legal, or commercial
	ends.

	"When in his last year, Oliver Cromwell essayed to break the
	Dutch commercial power and, by his Mercantile Act, secured
	that every cargo shipped to England was carried in English
	bottoms, there resulted a vast increase in the nation's
	shipping. As our commerce expanded, English writing gained in
	currency and gradually sloughed off those decorative
	accretions, and the *testegiatta* kind of hand was left to the
	ladies.

	"But as commercial clerkships became desirable positions a
	fine opportunity presented itself to such professors as John
	Ayres (1680), Charles Snell (1708), Charles Shelley (1708),
	John Clark (1708), and others. These all learned from the
	Dutch masters a knack of creating a hand which was tidy as
	well as speedy.

	"The English masters gradually drew away from these originals,
	and by means of changes which were slight but important, they
	expressed those characteristics which the next generation
	regarded as thoroughly English and admirable for the purposes
	of salesmanship. As is pointed out in § 9, the commercial
	success of England drew hearty foreign respect for the script
	in which our bills of lading and notes of exchange were
	executed.

	"By the middle of the eighteenth century a complete change had
	taken place in English writing. The gradual laying aside of
	decorative superfluities had brought about a situation which
	would have struck the writing-masters of the previous century
	as lacking in interest because deficient in variety. Masters
	had scarcely any calligraphical curriculum to compare with the
	rich collections of scripts to be found in Beauchesne or
	Materot or Van den Velde. The English seventeenth-century men
	taught besides gothic and court hands, certain 'Cursorie hands
	not heretofore extant, newlie com in use amongst the gentrie';
	they would have considered the teaching of 'arithmetick and
	accompts' as a condescension. Martin Billingsley taught
	delicate italic hands for ladies, stronger italic hands fit
	for cavaliers, and several set and running gothics for
	secretaries, lawyers, and ordinary people.

	"The words which George Bickham, Sen., prefixed to his
	_British Youth's Instructor_ (1754) will bear quotation. He
	writes on conditions fourscore years before:

	"'Our forefathers practised a small running secretary hand,
	and it was as great a rarity to meet with a person who had not
	been so taught as it is now to meet with one that is. To talk
	then of round hand, and persuade the practice of it, was the
	same thing, as it would be now to introduce a new character
	unknown to the generality of mankind. But at length the
	excellency and usefulness of the round hand prevailing with
	many eminent penmen, to shew the delicacy of it and its
	natural tendency to facilitate and despatch business, being
	considered it is universally received and practised by all
	degrees of men, in all employments, the law only excepted'.

	"This same round hand is to-day [i.e., 1931] not merely
	English but European. Even in the eighteenth century the
	precedence of nations was changing. 'Les François', says
	Dubois [i.e., Jacques Dubois, _Histoire abrégée de l'Ecriture_
	(Paris, 1772)], 'semblent être maintenant les seuls Maîtres
	d'Ecriture de l'Europe. Les ltaliens l'ont totalement
	négligée, les Allemands n'ont pas changé la leur, les
	Hollandois suivent la Bâtarde unie de l'Angleterre; en un mot
	la France et l'Angleterre fournissent aux autres des modèles
	d'Ecriture'."


... Returning to Conrad's initial questions: several of the C17
copy-books included detailed instructions (some in verse, as was then
customary, in order to render them more memorable for students) on how
to make and hold a pen.

(Speaking of etymology, I'd forgotten what the historical origins of
the "Pen-knife" actually were. Hard to imagine today's teacher giving
400+ little boys in a schoolroom their very own knives to cut quills
with.... ;-)

At least one set of these C17 "Observations or rules for the making of
the Pen" were illustrated, and I'll post the pix for all to see in the
next couple of days.

Thus far, I've not found any strictures at all regarding which hand
one was supposed to write with, although all C17 illustrations I've
seen of this depict a right hand holding the pen.

Curiously, the writing-masters made much of what kind of body posture
one needed to adopt in order to write a good hand, but nothing about
which hand one used for this....

FWIW, I plan to eventually provide HTML transcriptions of
Billingsley's (and others') printed observations on their art.

One especially fascinating aspect of C17 instruction in penmanship was
the explicit gendering of "hands".

Deborah
_____

Deborah Taylor-Pearce
[email protected]










___________________________________________________________________

Use the following address to post a message to all subscribers: 
 [email protected]

To subscribe, unsubscribe or change your options, visit:
 http://list.InformationDesign.org/mailman/listinfo/infodesign-cafe

For all Information Design matters:
 http://InformationDesign.org

Problems? Write to:
 [email protected]
___________________________________________________________________