The Janson book

Some words on the typeface’s journey throughout history

One of the most frequently cited examples of the misnaming of a classic type is that of ATF Garamond, in which Jannon, its creator, lost his identity. A similar error of attribution has occurred with the seventeenth-century Dutch old-style type called Janson, a face that has proved its usefulness over the past forty-three years since its revival indeed, it has become one of the most popular of book types. Determining this design’s provenance provides a com-plicated tale. Daniel Berkeley Updike, in his Printing Types of ��, discussed the Dutch types in great detail, but failed to properly identify the Janson design, although he described it and showed examples of both the roman and the italic. He simply captioned the illustrations ‘Dutch Roman Types. Erhardt Foundry Specimen, Leipsic, mg: In the second edition of his book (��), Updike ascribed the types to the Dutch punchcutter Anton Janson. In addition, he had included the face in the bibliography of his Merrymount Press, published in ��, in which he discussed a visit he had made to Leipzig during a European tour in ��. Unaccountably, however, he did not mention that he had purchased (Janson’ types from the Drugulin foundry of that city,

which was then in possession of the punches and...................................p.4

Janson ssi ReguaR 12 pt used foR the body text | page 2

Use of Janson

by Bruce Rogers

in The Poems by Shakespeare,

1940




matrices of the so-called Janson design, a fact noted by Stanley Morison. Although Updike had pur-chased ‘Janson’ fonts as early as 1903, he did not employ them for a book until 1918, even though he had but six roman types in his printing office before 1925. Updike had a great fondness for Caslon, which he selected for about forty percent of his books, and he also had a warm regard for Bell (also called Mountjoye), bought the same year as the Janson. That he did admire Janson, though, is evident from his employment of the letter in what is often considered the finest product of the Merrymount Press, the Book of Common Prayer, printed in 1930, a typographic masterpiece com-posed entirely in Janson types. One of the earliest descriptions of Janson by a leading typographic . historian appears in Stanley Morison’s On Type Faces, published for the Medici Society in 1923. Here are shown seven sizes, 8- to 36-point. In the introductory essay to this specimen, Morison writes after discussing the seventeenth-century types purchased by John Fell, Bishop of Oxford., for Oxford University Press — ‘An excellent letter of similar spirit but less archaic feeling is to be found in the roman and italic cut by Janson: this Dutch letter is a generation or two later in design and is more regular in its setting? (Mori-son was referring to the ragged alignment of the Fell types, approved by many modern typographers but deplored by just as many others.) However, in another small handbook, entitled On Type Designs Past and Present (1927), Morison did not include any remarks about Janson. Nor did the reputable A. F. Johnson of the British Museum in his Type Designs: Their History and Development, printed in 1934, a book conceived as an update of Updike’s Printing Types, although not attempting such broad cover-age as the original volumes. It is scarcely surprising, then, that when both the Mergenthaler Linotype Company and the Lanston Monotype Machine Company announced their revivals of Janson in 1937, most American printers had no choice but to accept the historic information that was disseminated by these firms. Neither firm could offer many facts to accompany the first specimens of the recuttings. Li-notype’s statement was simple: definite information concerning Anton Janson..................................... p.6



!"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_àbcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~� ¡¢£¤¥¦§¨©ª«¬®¯°±²³´µ¶¸¹º»¼½¾¿ÀÁÂÃÄÅÆÇÈÉÊËÌÍÎÏÐÑÒÓÔÕÖ×ØÙÚÛÜÝÞßàáãâäåæçèéêëìíîïðñòóôõö÷øùúûüýþÿıŁłŒœŠšŸŽžƒˆˇ˘˙˚˛˜˝–—‘’‚“”„†‡•…‰‹›⁄™−∙��!”#$%&’()*+,- . /0123456789: ;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_àbcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~¡¢£¤¥¦§¨©ª«¬®¯°±²³´µ¶¸¹º»¼½¾¿ÀÁÂÃÄÅÆÇÈÉÊËÌÍÎÏÐÑÒÓÔÕÖ×ØÙÚÛÜÝÞßàáãâäåæçèéêë ì í î ïðñòóôõö÷øùúûüýþÿıŁłŒœŠšŸŽžƒˆˇ˘˙ ˚ ˛ ˜ ˝–—‘’‚“”„†‡•…‰‹›⁄™−∙��!”#$%&’()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@[\]^_ÀBCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ{|}~¡¢£¤¥¦§¨©ª«¬®¯°±²³´¶¸¹º»¼½¾¿ÀÁÂÃÄÅÆÇÈÉÊËÌÍÎÏÐÑÒÓÔÕÖ×ØÙÚÛÜÝÞSSÀÁÃÂÄÅÆÇÈÉÊËÌÍÎÏÐÑÒÓÔÕÖ÷ØÙÚÛÜÝÞŸIŁŁŒŒŠŠŸŽŽˇ˘˙˚˛˜˝–—‘’‚“”„†‡•…‰‹›⁄™−∙!”#$%&’()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@[\]^_àbcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~¡¢£¤¥¦§¨©ª«¬®¯°±²³´µ¶¸¹º»¼½¾¿ssàáãâäåæçèéêëìíîïðñòóôõö÷øùúûüýþÿiŁŁŒŒŠŠÿŽŽµˆˇ˘˙˚˛˜˝–—‘’‚“”„†‡•…‰‹›⁄™−∙!”#$%&’()*+,-./:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_àbcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~¡¢£¤¥¦§¨©ª«¬®¯°±²³´µ¶¸¹º»¼½¾¿ÀÁÂÃÄÅÆÇÈÉÊËÌÍÎÏÐÑÒÓÔÕÖ×ØÙÚÛÜÝÞßà

áãâäåæçèéêëìíîïðñòóôõö÷øùúûüýþÿıŁłŒœŠšŸŽžƒˆˇ˘˙˚˛˜˝–—‘’‚“”„†‡•…‰‹›⁄™−∙��!”#$%&’()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@AB

CDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_àbcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~¡¢£¤¥¦§¨©ª«¬®¯°±²³´µ¶¸¹º»¼½¾¿ÀÁÂÃÄÅÆÇÈÉ

ÊËÌÍÎÏÐÑÒÓÔÕÖ×ØÙÚÛÜÝÞßàáãâäåæçèéêëìíîïðñòóôõö÷øùúûüýþÿıŁłŒœŠšŸŽžƒˆˇ˘˙˚˛˜˝–—‘’‚“”„†‡•…‰‹›⁄™−∙��

Complete Glyph Table 11 pt (Regular, Italic, All Caps, Small Caps, Superscript, Subscript)


is difficult to obtain. The Monotype promotional showing — a beautifully designed and pro-duced twenty-eight-page booklet in three colors — contained an essay on Dutch types written by Sol Hess, then associate art director — of the company, who had overseen the adaptation. (Frederic W. Goudy was at that time Monotypes art director, but his responsibilities were of a consulting nature, leaving to Hess the eve-ryday decisions in the production of matrices. Hess was therefore quite independent, making a separate contribution to the American typographic scene.) Hess’s statement on the Janson specimen echoed that of Mergenthaler: ‘Unfortunately, little definite information is to be found concerning Anton Janson and his work: Both companies, it may be noted, perpetuated he erroneous impression that the types now named Janson had been designed by him. The misconception was sustained into the 1950s distrib-uted by the German Stempel foundry, of Frankfurt-am-Main, owner since 1919 of the original Janson punches and matrices. The Stempel account says that the types had been created in ‘the typefoundry of the famous Dutchman Anton Janson, and show the mark of superior craftsmanship in the I firm stems and hairlines?’ Dur-ing all these early years of confusion concerning its origin, Janson was becomingiwell known, not so much by commercial printers as by book typographers and collectors.

Janson ssi italic 12 pt used foR the body text | page 6

ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ

abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz&$£.,-:;!?’(“” ı��o

ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUV WXYZ abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz&$£.,-:;!?’(“” ı��o

Janson ssi ReguaR and italic 11 pt used foR the font pRiview | page 7

Glyphs of

1. Janson (Stempel)

2. Janson SSi

3. Janson (Linotype)

Linotype Janson was first produced in the United

States in 1937 under the guidance of C. H. Grif-

fith, the typographic director of Mergenthaler;

he used the Stempel original as the model for

this cutting. In the same year.....................p.8

Small Capitals

Standard Ligatures

Oldstyle Figures

Fractions

Superscript

Scientific Inferiors

Sample Character Set

Sample OpenType Features

Janson StdDesigned by Nicholas Kis, Robin Nicholas, Patricia Saunders in 1650

Published by Monotype

WWW.FONTSHOP.COM TOLL FREE AT 888 FF FONTS 415.252.1003

Standard Ligatures

Tabular Figures

Proportional Figures

Oldstyle Figures

Fractions

Superscript

Sample Character Set

Sample OpenType Features

Janson Text Std 56 ItalicDesigned by Nicholas Kis in 1650, Linotype Design Studio in 1985

Published by Linotype

WWW.FONTSHOP.COM TOLL FREE AT 888 FF FONTS 415.252.1003

1 3

2

How we see the type today



......Sol Hess undertook for the American Monotype firm a modification of the face, using as a pattern a version in a seventeenth-century book. Both of these revivals found immediate favor with the American printers, even though the types lack some of the crispness of the Stempel found-ry version, a factor that is most noticeable in the display sizes. It is, of course, currently offered by manufactur-ers of phototypesetting machines. Finally, it may be ob-served that the Ehrhardt design for the English Mono-type Corporation is patterned on the same original as the cuttings of Janson referred to above. A comparison of Ehrhardt and Janson indicates the fascinating differences that may result even between close copies of an original.

Janson ssi italic 9 pt used foR the legend text | page 9


The letter Q outline in:

Ehrhardt MT Bold

Janson Text 75 Bold (Linotype)

Janson ssi ReguaR 12 pt (small caps) used foR the body text | page 10

Who’s behind the original type?

most of what we know about the voskens family comes fRom wRitings of a tRansylvanian who tRained at theiR woRkshop. boRn in 1650, miklos kis (pRon. kish) tRavelled to holand when he was thiRty yeaRs old. he came to amsteRdam with a pRecise mision: the calvinist bishop tofeus had oRdeRed him to have the hungaRian bible pRinted at daniel else-vieR’s office, and supeRvise coRRections. when this pRoved impossible (as daniel elsevieR had died one month befoRe kis’ aRRival) kis decided to take on the Job himself. he spent some months as an appRentice pRinteR oR compositoR in the btaeu pRinting office, and son afteRfaRds enteRed the voskens woRkshop as an appRentice punchcutteR. he showed a Re-maRkable talent in cutting type. in less than thRee yeaRs he seems to have leaRned all theRe was to know about the cRaft. in his autobio-graphical notes he wrote: ‘my master’s father cut beautiful german types but no latin ones. my masteR cut RatheR good Roman and Ro-tunda types, but did not manage veRy well at cutting italics, which he left to me.’ kis also quoted his masteR saying that he would neveR have

agReed to teach his cRaft to any dutchman foR feaR of competition.

Janson ssi italic (small caps) 12 pt used foR the body text | page 11

In 1684, only four years after begInnIng hIs apprentIceshIps In prIntIng and punch-cuttIng, the self-wIlled KIs had started prIntIng hIs fIrst hungarIan bIble; set In hIs own typefaces, at the offIce of the amsterdam prInter olofsz. KIs contInued prIntIng relIgIous texts In the followIng years, but also started promotIng hImself as a punch-cutter. from 1687 thIs was hIs only occupatIon.KIs’s types are admIrable Indeed, especIally when taKIng Into account that he made them so shortly after he had learnt to cut punches. when comparIng hIs ItalIcs to theIr ImmedIate predecessors and contemporar-Ies, one notIces a number of devIatIons from the tradItIonal callIgraphIc model. there Is a ratIonalIty to them whIch was quIte new: the characters are slanted at a unIform angle; the stroKes end In a clear-cut horIzon-tal. equally remarKable Is the way the ItalIcs harmonIze wIth the romans.the amsterdam type specImen shows a consIstency and unIty that was quIte unIque at the tIme. whIle other specImens lIsted types by several punch-cutters, KIs’ Is probably the fIrst to show the worK of one sIngle desIgner. KIs’catalogue Is also one of the fIrst Instances of a body of worK In whIch the fonts In dIfferent sIzes do not looK lIKe so many IndIvIdual typefaces, but are clearly derIved from a sIngle unIfIed concept of what type should looK lIKe.

Who’s behind the original type?

Documents

The Janson book