18th Century Typography & Illustration: Diver’s Proverbs by Nathan Bailey
Here is another gem from fromoldbooks.org, Nathan Bailey’s 1721 printing of Diver’s Proverbs. For those of you who aren’t well versed in 18th century culture, this is a collection of cliche’s and other moral or commen sense one-liners. The book lists them and explains their meanings and origins.
The typography in this edition is a bit economical in its construction: you can tell the project was made on a budget, as the page size is small and the type seems somewhat hurried. Despite this, it is well done. The type is clear and almost magical, it is formal in construction yet somehow retains some playfulness. Also notice the mixture of blackletter fonts (used to set the actual proverb) with a standard serif. For a typographer working in the 1700′s, use of this blackletter, which had stopped being common in printed materials in the 1500s, probably seemed a bit retro-chic. We experience the same thing today when we see concert posters set in waving, curly disco fonts. Or, when we see motorcycle and/or LA indie fashion company logos set in-you guessed it!-blackletter.
Adding to this is the use of 2 ink colors: black and red. The typographer does something that isn’t very common today: accenting the first letter of each capitalized word (notice the first image) in a different color than the rest of the body text. I’m not a huge fan of that usage, although I think it works great setting the drop capitals in the following pages in red. On the title page, it seems that the typographer was just trying to use the red as much as possible, and the letters begin to stand out, creating bullet holes in the composition. Despite this, I see his or her personality showing through again: that sense of whimsy and playfulness which seems to be a theme in the composition and typesetting of this book. Sure, the unneccesary red undermines a harmonious composition, but the surprising introduction of personality redeems the piece.
Not only that, but these illustrations are absolutely delicious. A man reads solemnly whilst riding on the shell of a snail, a portly man with a sausage on a fork drinks aggressively from a mug. In the beer drinking illustration, the movement and other visual elements continually push the eye to the upturned mug: you can look at a different detail, but the eye is then pushed back; then you look at something else, and the eye is pushed back to the mug again. The mug becomes a hub, allowing the eye to move back and forth around the picture, yet always returning.
Two more antique typographic conventions to note: the use of the long s symbol, which looks like a lowercase f, and the convention of ending a page by putting the first word of the following page in the right margin, just below the text block.
Edit (2/28/2009):
Here is an example of an 18th century typographic work in a fanciful or whimsical style (as it is sometimes considered “the first children’s book”), presented for comparison with the above pieces:
It’s not actually clear to me how much of the typography was from the 1700s and how much was from the 1917 “fac simile”; I think the woodcuts are probably from 1917. Bailey’s Universal Etymological Dictionary did use blackletter for proverbs, though.
Liam
Thanks Liam, and thanks for maintaining your excellent collection. From my experience, the typography here looks like it was taken from the original. Especially from the style of the typeface and the use of elements that were outdated by 1917 (such as the long s). If it isn’t 18th century, then it was crafted to look like it was in an interesting retro style. If anyone comes up with more information on this, I would love to hear it.
It seems almost impossible to imagine that this typography is from the 1700s at all. It has all the hallmarks of turn-of-the-century art nouveau graphic design, and looks very little like the printing of, say, Benjamin Franklin who was quite active in 1721. I’m not an expert, but I’ve been spending a lot of time lately browsing through printing from the 1700s, and this work is far too slick and modern looking to be even inspired by 1700s design — with the exception, as you note, of the anachronistic extended lowercase s.
Still, a lovely find.
Thanks for the insight Christopher, and you may well be right. It’s true that the type and composition is more “fanciful” than most of what we see coming from the 1700s. I think we’ve established that the printing here was done in 1917, which is why the title page says it was printed by Yale University Press, MDCCCCXVII, which would translate to 1917.
However, based on the style, I think it is too quick to say that it wasn’t a reprinting of the original, or at least a copy or imitation of the original. As I said, it is more “fanciful,” but if we look at some of the more playful printing of the 18th century, we can see many similarities. For an example, I’ve attached a page from “A Little Pretty Pocket-Book, Intended for the Instruction and Amusement of Little Master Tommy,” Published by Isaiah Thomas, Worcester, Massachusetts, 1787.
As you can see, there is much similarity in the structure of the page, the slight uneven quality of the types’ baselines and x-heights (resulting from the letterpress used), the body typeface, the anachronistic short s, and the drop caps. As you see, it almost looks like it could’ve been printed by the same publisher. In the Diver’s Proverbs, I do believe that the use of the black letter was probably a 20th century excess (along with the title page), but the general structure of the body spreads seem to pay much homage to the original.
Regardless, due to the fact that it was printed in 1917, and seems to carry some 20th century styles, it would only make sense for me to retitle this to indicate that it is early 20th century typography referencing 18th century style. Though it would be a shame for me to change it if it were a duplicate of the original, which it very well could be.
HELLO
I JUST WANT TO SAY THAK YOU FOR THIS INFORMATION, CURRENTLY I’M STUDYING A TYPOGRAPHY MASTER, IN MEXICO, AND I’M INVESTIGATING ABOUT THE 18TH CENTURY, THIS INFORMATIONS IS GOLD FOR ME!!!
THAK YOU AGAIN!!!