Learning Copperplate...

[eduardp]

eduardp,

 

You're making rapid progress and you're producing very attractive writing.

 

 

Ken,

 

Thank you so much for your words. They mean a lot coming from you.

 

A couple of points -

 

Aim for a little more consistency. Try to keep all downstrokes the same width and try to achieve a visual balance in inter-letter spacing.

 

In "Copperplate" all straight downstrokes are the same weight from top to bottom. In 'f' for example, the downstroke goes to full weight as soon as the curve at the top is completed. There are no tapered strokes as in Spencerian.

In its original 18th century form, h & l usually had straight downstrokes without loops, as in my example English Roundhand posted above.

 

In looped descenders as in g & y, the downstroke stays at full, even weight and only tapers at the very bottom to form the loop.

 

If you're looking for great exemplars to study, look here -

 

http://www.iampeth.c...nship_index.php

 

 

Ken

 

What you've mentioned are some of my struggling points. I have difficulties in preserving the width and spacing between letters and this is happening on a guide sheet, but I hope that practice will change this.

As lessons I was using Engrossers Script by W.A. Baird and CP Zaner Lessons in Engrosser's Script and there I did not noticed that the downstrokes stays at full until the very bottom, because these were some of my biggest problems - when the downstrowkes in g, y change weight and also when this happens in h, l, b, etc at top. In the book you've mentioned I've seen that d and t do not have the same height, d being more like l and b, but in the others d is the same height as t or I did not get it right?

 

Eduard

[caliken]

Eduard,

 

This exemplar from an 18th century engraving, may help to clarify things.

 

http://i226.photobucket.com/albums/dd289/caliken_2007/WClark600.jpg

 

Notice how straight and even the downstrokes are.

 

Notice how quickly the downstroke reaches full weight after turning at the top of f h & l.

 

Notice how a weighted downstroke stays at the same weight until the very last moment before turning up into a hairline.

 

Notice how the downstroke in the old-fashioned s shape, appears to curve, but in fact, stays straight and at the same weight, for as much of its journey downwards, as possible.

 

Notice that whilst the last downstroke of m n and h curve very, very slightly, the weight of the stroke from top to bottom, doesn't vary.

 

It goes without saying that all straight downstrokes are parallel.

 

All of this, contributes to the beauty of this style of lettering.

 

Whilst the Engravers Scripts of both W A Baird and C P Zaner are attractive, they show the influence of Spencerian with occasionally tapered and swelled strokes. It's all in the eye of the beholder but, for me, this contributes nothing to the magnificence of the original English Roundhand. This style reached its absolute epitome by the middle of the 18th century and I see no point in altering it in any way.

The examples shown in the book by Enoch Noyes "Noyes's Penmanship" from 1839 are truly superb examples of English Roundhand written in the original style a century later. There are also several pages of minute lettering with an x height of 2mm.

 

However, if your choice is to follow the Engravers/Engrossers route, then the examples by W A Baird and C P Zaner are first class as are the videos by Dr Joe Vitolo on IAMPETH.

 

Ken

Edited June 27, 2012 by caliken

[eduardp]

Ken,

 

For the last couple of hours I'm staring at the example you've posted. I used it for today's practice hour and a lot of things became clearer. It is so beautiful because is simple, which in the end beauty means. I did not know all those differences between Copperplate and Engravers Script, but you are totally right. Looking closer on all the materials I've got it became clear that what you've presented is the classic part of this particular writing style.

Now I'm facing a big dilema - I like both styles, but I'm not sure how to approach the practice, trying to learn both seems that will mess all the little I "mastered" till now and maybe take them step by step and start with the classic part is the better approach. In the future I also want to try Spencerian and maybe then the Engravers Script will be the bridge between.

The most important now is that I'm enjoying it more with every day that passes and, because some light starts to appear on the horizon, everything seems much easier. I don't think that I will ever be closer to your mastery, but, as I mentioned in a previos post, I really love the ride and, for me, this is the most important part.

One last question - do you even use some guiding lines when you prepare the examples you post in the forum because the art seems inhumanly?

Thank you for everything and not only for the advices directed to me, but for all that you do in the forum. I could not imagine that this friendly atmosphere could exist.

 

Eduard

[caliken]

One last question - do you even use some guiding lines when you prepare the examples you post in the forum because the art seems inhumanly?

 

Although I can write reasonably straight, I don't see any virtue in making life any more difficult than it has to be, and yes, I frequently use guidelines.

 

On finished work on a heavy paper or card, I pencil in the lines and then remove them when the ink has dried. If I'm using an 80gsm paper, I sometimes underlay a lined sheet printed in black, so that I can just make out the lines showing through.

 

Alternatively, I use the same paper with the lines pre-printed in black and then write on the blank side, again with the lines showing through.

 

I sometimes use a pre-printed sheet with the slope lines included. I pre-print the sheets in black on my ink-jet printer, with the angle of the slope lines reversed, so that for Copperplate, the 55 degrees slope lines are printed at 35 degrees. When viewed through the back, these lines are at the correct angle of 55 degrees and are sufficiently visible as a writing guide.

 

Ken

Edited June 27, 2012 by caliken

[Columba Livia]

the word 'Copperplate' became synonomous with 'English Roundhand' which emerged at the beginning of the 18th century

 

a style of neat, round handwriting, usually slanted and looped, the thick and thin strokes being made by pressure with a flexible metal nib

 

-http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/copperplate?q=Copperplate

 

an old-fashioned decorative style of writing with long flowing letters

 

-http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/copperplate?q=copperplate

 

I feel confident that the word "copperplate" as in general use in the English language today is not synonymous with 18th century roundhand.

 

All of the other participants on this lengthy thread are studying and practicing a very specific style of lettering, as described by Salman in his original post and as epitomised in George Bickham's 'The Universal Penman'.

 

Some people are using IAMPETH material and/or the currently in print Zanerian Manual and I'm sure others are using the Eleanor Winters book. Technically (and this isn't a criticism) none of those are the very specific style of lettering as epitomized in the Universal Penman because the Roundhand lettering in the Universal penman would have been done with a broad cut quill (albeit a narrow one). Thus, if one wishes to study and and practice that very specific style of lettering one needs a quill and to avoid any later material which used steel pens.

 

I'm fairly certain no one in this thread is using quills, though I would be delighted and fascinated if someone was!

 

I don't understand your reference to 'the larger sizes of 18th century English Roundhand'. There are many examples which were written very small indeed - or have I misunderstood?

 

Here is some small 18th century (1791) English roundhand (with some of Cooper's writing pasted into it):

 

http://i.imgur.com/GVj2U.jpg

 

Note how the m and n especially become proportionally wider and the turns have become more angular.

 

This variation in form depending on size can also been see in 19th century copperplate writing. I will show some examples here, first from "Robertson's Universal Penman" published in 1830:

 

http://i.imgur.com/glANP.jpg

 

And "Foster's Penmanship Illustrated" published in 1843:

 

http://i.imgur.com/FPZ0B.jpg

 

As the size of the letters decreases they become wider, ascenders and descenders are longer in proportion, the turns more angular and loops appear on ascenders, and the minuscules become smaller in proportion to the capitals. There is also a slight increase in slant.

[caliken]

As the size of the letters decreases they become wider, ascenders and descenders are longer in proportion, the turns more angular and loops appear on ascenders, and the minuscules become smaller in proportion to the capitals. There is also a slight increase in slant.

 

You are mistaken, and to post inferior examples of small Copperplate, doesn't help your argument.

 

This 18th century example, shows small, perfectly formed, Copperplate lettering

with the same proportions etc. as the larger lettering.

 

I'm not an 18th Century Writing Master but I can write Copperplate at an x heright of 2mm without changing proportions or slope.

 

Ken

http://i226.photobucket.com/albums/dd289/caliken_2007/bICJKHAM654.jpg

Edited June 28, 2012 by caliken

[caliken]

a style of neat, round handwriting, usually slanted and looped, the thick and thin strokes being made by pressure with a flexible metal nib

 

-http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/copperplate?q=Copperplate

 

an old-fashioned decorative style of writing with long flowing letters

 

-http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/copperplate?q=copperplate

 

I feel confident that the word "copperplate" as in general use in the English language today is not synonymous with 18th century roundhand.

In these definitions, the singular is used. They are describing one specific style of lettering - 18th century English Roundhand, now known as Copperplate.

 

Richard Binder puts it rather well -

 

http://i226.photobucket.com/albums/dd289/caliken_2007/Untitled-copp500.jpg

Edited June 28, 2012 by caliken

[caliken]

Some people are using IAMPETH material and/or the currently in print Zanerian Manual and I'm sure others are using the Eleanor Winters book. Technically (and this isn't a criticism) none of those are the very specific style of lettering as epitomized in the Universal Penman because the Roundhand lettering in the Universal penman would have been done with a broad cut quill (albeit a narrow one). Thus, if one wishes to study and and practice that very specific style of lettering one needs a quill and to avoid any later material which used steel pens.

 

Technically, they are the specific style of lettering as epitomized in The Universal Penman but produced, with varying degrees of success, as writing with a pen.

As you say, the original writing was done with a narrow-cut stiff quill. However, the copperplate engraving 'altered' the lettering and produced a form which was impossible to replicate with a firm edged nib. Hence the development and use of the pointed flexible nib. Whether a quill or a steel nib is used today, is irrelevant.

 

The sources you mention, are all derived from Eighteenth Century Roundhand including IAMPETH material and the Zanerian Manual.

 

In my collection are -

 

Calligraphy in the Copperplate style - Kaufman & Homelsky

Mastering Copperplate Calligraphy - Eleanor Winters

Copperplate Calligraphy - Dick Jackson

The Technique of Copperplate Calligraphy - Gordon Turner

 

The last one is sub-titled 'A Manual and Model Book of the Pointed Pen Method'

 

All of these books relate to one style only - 18th century English Roundhand.

[caliken]

Deleted

Edited June 28, 2012 by caliken

[caliken]

I feel confident that the word "copperplate" as in general use in the English language today is not synonymous with 18th century roundhand.

I've been writing this style of script, professionally, for many years as the only script decribed as 'Copperplate'.

 

I occasionally refer to it as 'English Roundhand' but this title is not generally understood whereas everyone knows what 'Copperplate handwriting' looks like.

 

On what do you base your confidence?

 

Ken

[Columba Livia]

You are mistaken, and to post inferior examples of small Copperplate, doesn't help your argument.

 

I posted examples of Copperplate writing showing changes as the size decreased; not all copperplate script used that approach, but some did. I respect your opinion when you denounce the examples as being "inferior", but it is only an opinion. They differ from the forms in the Universal Penman and that does not make them inferior, but different.

 

I have found the copperplate script lessons I am currently working through, to be extremely challenging and exciting, especially in respect to working on a perfectly blank sheet of paper. It's required me to rethink grip, how I sit, the paper/ink/nibs/penholder I use, pressure, posture &c. and has made me look at letterforms in new ways. I especially realize, thanks to how light the shades are, that I was perceiving/making shades thicker than they really were before.

 

I'm not saying that everyone should do things like this or that it is better than any other approach, but that I believe it to be a valid and historically grounded approach to copperplate and I hope my journey is of help to other people and that I can offer support and advice.

 

This is a creative expressions forum and this is my creative expression.

 

In these definitions, the singular is used. They are describing one specific style of lettering - 18th century English Roundhand, now known as Copperplate.

 

The Cambridge British English "an old-fashioned decorative style of writing with long flowing letters" is too loose to be taken as specifically referring to the Roundhand of the 18th century. "Old fashioned" is just as much the 19th century as the 18th, and "style" is very open to interpretation. "In the style of" does not mean identical to.

 

the copperplate engraving 'altered' the lettering and produced a form which was impossible to replicate with a firm edged nib.

 

Well-tempered goose quills are pretty flexible, especially if you cut the tines right, so you can have a flexible broad edge. The idea that engravers and/or engraving altered the letter forms, and that the forms in the Universal Penman &c. cannot be reproduced with a quill is a myth, propagated by the followers of Edward Johnston. Please see "The Great Copperplate Myth" by Peter Gilderdale, which appears in the "Letter Arts Review" Vol.15, No.1. and "The Pointed Nib" by Paul Antonio in "The Copperplate Special Interest Group" April 2007.

 

The sources you mention, are all derived from Eighteenth Century Roundhand including IAMPETH material and the Zanerian Manual.

 

And the sources I'm learning from are also all derived from 18th Century Roundhand. After all, none of the 19th century Penman were working in a vacuum but working with and developing the letters of their predecessors in the 18th century. The Engrossers/Engraver's scripts were influenced by the oblique holder, steel pen and semi-angular scripts/Ornamental penmanship

 

In my collection are -

 

Calligraphy in the Copperplate style - Kaufman & Homelsky

Mastering Copperplate Calligraphy - Eleanor Winters

Copperplate Calligraphy - Dick Jackson

The Technique of Copperplate Calligraphy - Gordon Turner

 

The last one is sub-titled 'A Manual and Model Book of the Pointed Pen Method'

 

Check out the foreword in the Gordon Turner book and you'll see that he refers to "roundhand or copperplate sometimes called Spencerian script"! A very loose definition of Copperplate indeed there. The blurb refers to "roundhand, the American version of Copperplate".

 

I occasionally refer to it as 'English Round-hand' but this title is not generally understood whereas everyone knows what 'Copperplate handwriting' looks like.

 

That suggests that copperplate is more of a loose and/or umbrella term than synonymous with 18th century English round-hand, because if copperplate was truly synonymous with English round-hand then people would know that copperplate means 18th century English round-hand instead of, as with Gordon Turner for example, using it as an umbrella for several different things.

[caliken]

I posted examples of Copperplate writing showing changes as the size decreased; not all copperplate script used that approach, but some did. I respect your opinion when you denounce the examples as being "inferior", but it is only an opinion. They differ from the forms in the Universal Penman and that does not make them inferior, but different.

To alter the proportions and style of lettering, purely on the basis of the size of the script, is indicitive of poor craftsmanship IMO. I can only assume that the writers found applying the necessary control, too difficult. I can think of no other reason for such drastic modifications which, logically, would create gradual variations on a sliding scale as the lettering decreases in size? surely not!

 

This exercise is taken from my book 'Copperplate Handwriting'

 

http://i226.photobucket.com/albums/dd289/caliken_2007/Copperplateexercises500.jpg

Edited June 30, 2012 by caliken

[Mickey]

I posted examples of Copperplate writing showing changes as the size decreased; not all copperplate script used that approach, but some did. I respect your opinion when you denounce the examples as being "inferior", but it is only an opinion. They differ from the forms in the Universal Penman and that does not make them inferior, but different.

To alter the proportions and style of lettering, purely on the basis of the size of the script, is indicitive of poor craftsmanship IMO. I can only assume that the writers found applying the necessary control, too difficult. I can think of no other reason for such drastic modifications which, logically, would create gradual variations on a sliding scale as the lettering decreases in size? surely not!

 

 

Unless, of course, the intent was to change the proportions without making radical changes in technique and tools, allowing (or forcing) the letter shapes to alter naturally with the scale (or any other parameter), in which case this seems clever or inventive rather than degenerate.

 

As we discussed regarding Spencerian script, even the most conservative practitioners will allow there is some stylistic latitude within a style, school, or mode, unless one want's to emulate one practitioner only (e.g., Madarasz). As "The Universal Penman" is dominated by Bickham's own hand (both as penman and engraver?), it may be overly conservative to describe exemplars which fall outside parameters derived from that book as being apostate, degenerate, or inept, unless it is our intention to put forth that book as the gamut of legal expression in "Copperplate." The question then become how well such prescription and proscription serves the community of ink slingers.

 

There is risk in prescribing art forms after the fact either from a limited universe of examples or leaning too heavily on a (self) limited body of work which speaks to the prescribers' aesthetic sensibility, a sensibility which is a product of the age in which the prescribers live, not the age in which the art was produced. Unfortunately, this is usually the case.

 

If, for example, we defined baroque music based predominately on the work of Telemann (who was vastly famous during his time), J. S. Bach (who was not) would be seen more as a footnote than as a towering, culminating figure he was. Had not subsequent composers (Mendelssohn, among many other) preserved and championed Bach's works, he would likely have been lost to us. Still, Telemann is probably more representative of the sort of music produced during that era than Bach, who was probably its most brilliant practitioner.

 

Prescription should really be a bit looser than is really comfortable for most prescribers.

Edited June 30, 2012 by Mickey

[caliken]

Well-tempered goose quills are pretty flexible, especially if you cut the tines right, so you can have a flexible broad edge. The idea that engravers and/or engraving altered the letter forms, and that the forms in the Universal Penman &c. cannot be reproduced with a quill is a myth, propagated by the followers of Edward Johnston. Please see "The Great Copperplate Myth" by Peter Gilderdale, which appears in the "Letter Arts Review" Vol.15, No.1. and "The Pointed Nib" by Paul Antonio in "The Copperplate Special Interest Group" April 2007.

 

 

I don't know either of the sources you quoted, but it's reasonable to assume that they disagree with my understanding of the historical situation!

 

Far from being a myth, this is supported in the writing of Geprge Bickham, himself.

 

'Make All Your Body-Strokes with the Full & all Hair-Strokes with the corner of Your Pen.

 

Never lean hard on your Pen

 

Make the nib of your Pen for the Round & Round-Text Hands the breadth of the full Stroke.'

 

In other words, this is referring to a firm, narrow-edged quill with no mention of flexibilty.

 

Most informed sources agree that the pointed flexible pen was introduced in an attempt to emulate the work of the copper engravers.

 

Ken

[caliken]

We could exchage quotes forever, but I'm sure that you agree that this becomes a bit pointless after a while!

 

This long-running thread was started by Salman who was intending to learn to write Copperplate Script. The fact that he was entirely successful, is a testament to the value of the interchange of ideas.

 

For all the participants (with one notable exception!) this is the script called 'English Roundhand' which is more commonly known as 'Copperplate'.

 

I'm all in favour of experimentation with variations of the Classic Scripts - I've even produced a book called 'Italic Variants'.

 

My problem is with this particular thread.

 

In learning, I'm a great believer in sticking to one style of writing at a time. Also, I've always been convinced that mixing influential sources when studying, is a bad thing as mixed lettering rarely works well. I think that it's much better to seek out the best possible exemplar, and stay with it. Once mastered, there is then plenty of opportunity for experimentation.

 

There are of course, many variations of flexible nib writing which descend from English Roundhand but studying more than one at a time, is not the best way to learn, and this thread could easily become a mish-mash of various interpretations, which helps no-one.

 

I agree that Copperplate has been applied to other forms of flex-nibbed writing (especially in America) but its use as the other name for 'English Roundhand' is, by far, the most prevelant. Every book I've even seen with 'Copperplate' in its title has been referring to this script. Granted, some of them go on to show variations, but the basic learning material is the one originally known as 'English Roundhand'.

 

If only this Topic had been entitled 'Learning English Roundhand....let's do it together' we'd have had no problems!!

 

Ken

Edited June 30, 2012 by caliken

[Columba Livia]

To alter the proportions and style of lettering, purely on the basis of the size of the script, is indicitive of poor craftsmanship IMO. I can only assume that the writers found applying the necessary control, too difficult. I can think of no other reason for such drastic modifications which, logically, would create gradual variations on a sliding scale as the lettering decreases in size? surely not!

 

This exercise is taken from my book 'Copperplate Handwriting'

 

Joseph Carstairs had an exercise involving reducing the size, and one of his followers, Benjamin Franklin foster produced a similar one thus:

 

http://i.imgur.com/MVmoO.jpg

 

http://www.iampeth.com/books/foster/foster_practical_penmanship_page67.html

 

(I'd show Carstairs', but it's a fold out plate and the scan left the plate folded)

 

Joseph Carstairs makes it very clear in his books, "Lectures on the art of Writing" and "Tachygraphy" that he was concearned with "freedom", "ease", "quickness" and "movement". He wanted the student to "give the writing a free and open appearance". Exercises like that were intended to aid in developing freedom, ease and movement and they didn't mean that they couldn't produce more traditional examples if they pleased: http://www.iampeth.com/books/foster/foster_practical_penmanship_page45.html

 

These two men were very successful 19th century writing masters so I have little fear that they lacked skill with a pen.

 

So, for me this is at the heart of copperplate (and calligraphy): I want to be able to write with freedom, ease and quickness, producing free and open writing. If you don't like that or the sources I'm studying from then fine, I respect your opinion and I ask you to respect mine. I'm not going to argue that Foster, Carstairs and the 19th century tradition is the only acceptable copperplate and that any deviation from them is wrongbad.

 

I think that it's much better to seek out the best possible exemplar, and stay with it. Once mastered, there is then plenty of opportunity for experimentation.

 

That is why I am working through the lessons from this book I'm currently doing, right to the end, till I've attained some level of skill at this. When that is done, I can start studying from a fresh source. I'm not asking or expecting anyone else to give up what they're studying in favour of what I'm studying.

 

I agree that Copperplate has been applied to other forms of flex-nibbed writing (especially in America) but its use as the other name for 'English Roundhand' is, by far, the most prevelant.

 

Look at the wide variety in form of fonts tagged with "copperplate" here:

 

http://www.myfonts.com/search/tag%3Acopperplate/fonts/

 

This is a good indicator of current usage of the word, more so that calligraphy books even, which are niche in comparison to the world of graphic design/typography/fonts.

 

Compare this: http://www.myfonts.com/fonts/paratype/little-cecily/ to this: http://www.myfonts.com/fonts/fontbureau/novia/light/

 

Also, check out page 212 of the 1985 edition of "The calligraphers Handbook" (Tom Barnard's article) and see the forms he calls copperplate. And, again with putting Spencerian under copperplate: "Copperplate or (in the United States) Spencerian", Calligraphy, Michael Gullick, 1995.

 

Far from being a myth, this is supported in the writing of Geprge Bickham, himself.

 

'Make All Your Body-Strokes with the Full & all Hair-Strokes with the corner of Your Pen.

 

Never lean hard on your Pen

 

Make the nib of your Pen for the Round & Round-Text Hands the breadth of the full Stroke.'

 

I didn't write that right. Goose quill pens have more or less "pliability" as a natural (by)product and one of the reasons why steel dip pens did not catch on at first was that they were too stiff compared to what people were used to, till cutting slits improved matters. Pointed quills taking advantage of this pliability were used for flourishing, an example of a "pen for straight lines" (plume a la traite) for flourishing can be seen in the plates for Diderots' Encylopedie:

 

http://artflx.uchicago.edu/images/encyclopedie/V19/plate_19_21_12.jpeg

 

However such a quill was for not for writing Roundhand. As you quoted from Bickham, people used the corner of a broad nib (iron-gall ink will flow very readily from the corner of quills, far more so than metal pens) for hairlines. This is from "Practical Penmanship" by Benjamin Franklin Foster (1830):

 

"continuing the nib on the thumb nail, place the edge of the knife across it, so as to make the knife and the side of the pen next the haft form an acute angle, and cut off a minute portion of the point, in a perpendicular direction. The right prong of the nib, as held when writing, will be a little longer than the other, for the purpose of making the hair stroke".

 

The broad cut quill can indeed produce the forms seen in the universal penman, and it is a rather strange idea that people would be teaching a form of writing that could not actually be produced with the implement they used for writing.

 

Most informed sources agree that the pointed flexible pen was introduced in an attempt to emulate the work of the copper engravers.

 

The problem with these informed sources is that they are repeating the pet theories of E. Johnston and his students or repeating people who repeated them and so on. The claim that copperplate letterforms could not be properly reproduced with a quill, that engravers invented them etc originates with Edward Johnston and his students and since we know they are an extremely unreliable source (claiming that Johnston re-discovered the broad pen, that calligraphy was a lost art, that pointed quills were used to write copperplate &c.) there is little reason to believe them on such extraordinary claims.

 

Unfortunately I do not have access to my copy of the Letter arts review at the moment, but when I get back to it within a few weeks, I will be able to illustrate further from "The Copperplate Myth".

Edited July 1, 2012 by Columba Livia

[caliken]

Also, check out page 212 of the 1985 edition of "The calligraphers Handbook" (Tom Barnard's article) and see the forms he calls copperplate.

 

This variation of Copperplate is Vere Foster's 'Civil Service Script'.

 

This is the style of writing I was taught in Britain in the 1940s. I posted it on this forum some time ago.

 

The difference between us, is that I posted it as a separate topic, as a distinctive form of lettering, whereas you stuck your variation in the middle of an established thread concerning a specific lettering style! :bonk:

 

Seriously, even at this late stage, I suggest that you consider starting it as a new topic. There may well be enough interest to develop a group of 'Angular Running Hand' writers. If you do, I suggest that you post the complete alphabet, upper and lower case, as so far, there is only the one line of writing which you posted earlier. I read earlier, that you don't have the book but a print-out. Is this easily available on the net for downloading?

Edited July 1, 2012 by caliken

[caliken]

"continuing the nib on the thumb nail, place the edge of the knife across it, so as to make the knife and the side of the pen next the haft form an acute angle, and cut off a minute portion of the point, in a perpendicular direction. The right prong of the nib, as held when writing, will be a little longer than the other, for the purpose of making the hair stroke".

The broad cut quill can indeed produce the forms seen in the universal penman, and it is a rather strange idea that people would be teaching a form of writing that could not actually be produced with the implement they used for writing.

To reiterate - George Bickham in 1733 said-

 

'Make the nib of your Pen for the Round & Round-Text Hands the breadth of the full Stroke.'

 

In other words, a stiff, edged nib, cut to the width of the downstrokes. Exactly the same as for Italic, from which it derived, with no mention of nib flexibilty.

 

The method you quoted by Benjamin Franklin Foster is dated 1830, almost a century after the publication of the engraved English Roundhand in The Universal Penman.

 

There's no way of knowing for certain, how it was produced, prior to the engravings of c1740.

 

Having said that, I'm quite prepared to accept that your sources may be right. I have to confess that I'm not very interested in the origin of English Roundhand and 'Who' did 'what' and 'how' back in the 1700s will never be known for certain - and does it really matter?

 

I'm far more interested in the actually writing of scripts and 'The Universal Penman' remains very special to me. When my first copy disintegrated with use, I bought two new copies. I had the spine removed from one copy and keep it in a loose leaf folder; I use it regularly as a guide and for general inspiration. The second copy is stored safely away, in pristine condition. I have written, and will continue to write, some of the many variations of this script, but the original version remains, for me, the most beautiful lettering ever produced by human hand - regardless of how it was done!

 

As you'll gather from this, I'm far from being an Edward Johnston disciple; most of whom dismiss the use of the flexible, pointed pen as sacrilege!

On the other hand, you'll have to search very hard on IAMPETH for acknowledgement that Italic Script even exists!

 

Ken

Edited July 2, 2012 by caliken

[caliken]

deleted

Edited July 1, 2012 by caliken

[smk]

Hello all - I have been away for the last 10 days or so and its good to be back. Its nice to see there has been healthy activity and discussions here - took me a while to catch up on everything.

 

As for the different styles of Copperplate in one thread, I think it can get confusing. I pursued the studies of the Engraver's text in another thread myself (see this old post). I believe the version Columba Livia is learning is interesting enough to deserve its own thread - I might even join you there, this style seems more usable on a day-to-day basis.

 

Looking forward to the next round of exercise sheets from everybody.

 

 

Salman

Edited July 4, 2012 by smk