Home› History of Typography
Options

Authentic naive 17th century “grotesque” or postwar power tool disimprovement?

JLAJLA Posts: 8
in History of Typography

Hello there,

I’m interested in the letterforms of this cross. It’s part of a small pilgrimage trail near the river Rhine. The inscription dates it to 1691.

The letters and drawings looks strangely monolinear, though. The other 17th/18th century crosses of the trail sport many different styles of lettering, but all are clearly chiseled and nothing like this.

Can this “grotesque” be authentic (maybe vernacular carving as @Simon Cozens proposed on typo.social) or did someone trace the letters with a power tool in modern times, possibly trying to make the weathered text legible again?



Comments

  • Options
    Miles NewlynMiles Newlyn Posts: 238
    edited April 4
    It looks traced with a power tool as you suggest. There are areas without clear lettering suggesting that when the person with the power tool could not decipher the old letters, they just left those areas alone. better photos would help. It's very interesting!
  • Options
    JLAJLA Posts: 8
    Thanks, @Miles Newlyn, the complete absence of some letters vs. the sharp presence of neighbouring ones indeed seems to be a telltale clue of anachronistic tampering. I’ll revisit the site with a proper camera.

  • Options
    Thomas PhinneyThomas Phinney Posts: 2,757
    The main thing is, the original lettering would have had the “V” cut characteristic of chiseling. When traced over with some sort of power tool, it loses that and becomes just rounded.

    I assume one can have power tools and still do chiseling, but at least much of the time one sees this sort of rounded cut, and it is clear evidence of more-modern tooling. By which I mean at least 1900 and probably much later. (The first power tool was a drill, in 1895.) I expect somebody with more expertise in stone carving than I, can say more.
  • Options
    John HudsonJohn Hudson Posts: 2,983
    The main thing is, the original lettering would have had the “V” cut characteristic of chiseling.
    Something like 99% of inscribed Latin lettering chiseled in stone is done with a v-cut, because it is both efficient and visually attractive, but it isn’t the only method. One sometimes encounters, for example, either raised or incised letters made with a pointed chisel, which removes stone less cleanly than a cutting chisel, leaving a pockmarked texture.

    In this case, I am inclined to agree that this looks like a power tool has been used, because of the characteristic rounded inner shape of the strokes. You could do this with a Dremel.
  • Options
    John HudsonJohn Hudson Posts: 2,983
    On the subject of atypical inscriptions, this one in Wells Cathedral is puzzling.


  • Options
    JLAJLA Posts: 8
    Thanks, @John Hudson & @Thomas Phinney.
    John Hudson said:

    In this case, I am inclined to agree that this looks like a power tool has been used, because of the characteristic rounded inner shape of the strokes. You could do this with a Dremel.
    Yes, I thought of a Dremel, too. It’s a bit hard to make out in the mobile phone shots but the traces gave enough of an impression, apparently.
  • Options
    JLAJLA Posts: 8
    John Hudson said:
    On the subject of atypical inscriptions, this one in Wells Cathedral is puzzling.


    “Puzzling” as in “unclear means of inscribing”? What an appealing look, though.

  • Options
    John HudsonJohn Hudson Posts: 2,983
    Puzzling in a number of ways. It is hard to tell from the lettering style when the stone was carved, because it is not typical of the first half of the 18th Century—the date range indicated in the text—but it isn’t obviously from a specific later period either. Some of the letters and numerals could easily be 18th Century, but then there are those squarish bowls that are not something I would associate with that period.

    I am also unsure of the method used, because of the absence of a v-cut. It is quite a shallow inscription.

    Sometimes, I find things that are so idiosyncratic, I imagine the stonecutter thinking ‘You know what? I am going to try something new on this job.’
  • Options
    JLAJLA Posts: 8
    Thanks for clarifying. The squarish bowls are what makes the letters stand out. The inscription has a 1950s vibe to it.
  • Options
    Russell McGormanRussell McGorman Posts: 261
    edited April 8
    Proof of time traveling Stone Masons?... (Just sayin').

    Or a naive 17th century stone cutter just whackin' the chisel straight into the slab with no concern for efficiency,r tradition. or probably his eyes.

    Photos I've seen of ancient or medieval Norse stone inscriptions appear to be carved with a similar technique. Sadly the photographers seldom dwell on the technique or capture the texture of the tool marks, so, I'm kind of guessing. (I'd rule out Dremels, having burnt out a few on far less demanding materials.) If it's made with modern tools, they'd have been using something like reciprocating hammer chisels.
Sign In or Register to comment.