For all your design needs.

All About Romans. No, not the Roman Empire, or the Caesars, or Christ, but the typographic distinction between Old Style Roman and Modern Roman typography. Roman typefaces are among the most influential developments in the history of typography. Although all Roman types descend from the humanist writing of the Italian Renaissance, they evolved into distinct stylistic categories over several centuries. Two of the most important are Old Style (Old Face) and Modern (Didone) Roman typefaces. They differ not only in appearance but also in their historical origins, methods of production, readability, and aesthetic philosophy. Old Style and Modern Roman typefaces represent two major stages in the evolution of Western typography. Old Style typefaces preserve the humanist ideals of Renaissance calligraphy, emphasizing warmth, balance, and readability. Modern (Didone) typefaces embody the Enlightenment pursuit of precision and refinement, using strong contrast, vertical stress, and delicate serifs to create a dramatic, sophisticated appearance. Together, they established the foundation for later serif classifications—including Transitional, Slab Serif, and Contemporary designs—and continue to influence typography in publishing, branding, and digital media today.

In typographic terminology, script refers to a class of typefaces designed to emulate handwriting or calligraphy, regardless of whether letters are connected. Cursive, by contrast, refers to a style of handwriting characterized by connected, flowing letterforms developed for efficient writing. Consequently, cursive writing is one important source of script typefaces, but script typography also includes many designs that are not truly cursive. While a script typeface may connect every letter, or only certain combinations, or even none at all, cursive faces are characterized by connected letters. Thus, English Roundhand, Spencerian writing, the Palmer method, and modern school writing are all cursives. Cursive writing evolved because ancient scribes needed to write quickly.

Scripts & Cursives. In typography and calligraphy, the terms script and cursive are related but not synonymous. They are often used interchangeably in popular usage, but type historians and calligraphers generally distinguish them by purpose, construction, and historical origin . While all cursive-inspired fonts are script typefaces, not all script faces are cursives. Thus, a calligraphic font with disconnected capitals and lowercase letters is a script font, but not truly cursive. Background . Two previous posts are a good place to start this discussion — See "Calligraphy & Typography" a t https://www.caretypography.com/calligraphy-typography . Also, see "Pen-Lettering History" at https://www.caretypography.com/pen-lettering-history . In typographic terminology, script refers to a class of typefaces designed to emulate handwriting or calligraphy, regardless of whether letters are connected. Cursive, by contrast, refers to a style of handwriting characterized by connected, flowing letterforms developed for efficient writing. Consequently, cursive writing is one important source of script typefaces, but script typography also includes many designs that are not truly cursive. Robert Bringhurst in The Elements of Typographic Style (Vancouver: Hartley & Marks, 2012) classifies script as a category of typefaces derived from handwriting and distinguishes formal and informal script traditions. He notes that "there are thousands of typefaces that stand outside the conservative and tradition-bound world of text type, and that look as if they might have been handwritten rather than drawn, carved or inscribed. Some are formal, some informal, some connected and some made of separate letters. Typographers often lump them together unscientifically as script types." (p. 193, 1992 Edition). Bringhurst says that "in general, scripts are also more closely tied to particular moods, places and times than text types are, and types that pass quickly in and out of fashion are extraneous to the subject of this book." (p. 193) He notes that scripts are important only as "setting off" a single word or line of normal text copy. He then discusses the typefaces Beowolf, Carolina, Legende, Ondine, Present and Salto. 

Linotype's Party Emblems in 1920 . Type follows and often mimics cultural fashions and ideas. Consequently, Victorian type flowed with the ornamentation of that period. Punk and Grunge type traced with a rebellious period in American culture. The political landscape of the 1920s was shaped by the aftermath of World War I, economic prosperity, social change, and debates over the role of government. While the specific parties differed by country, the decade is most often discussed in terms of the United States, where the Republican Party dominated national politics. Being a major typesetter for the period, Linotype issued characters that reflected the political parties and feelings of the times. Such type emblems showed up in their 1920 publication of One Line Specimens .

The Legibility Group . This group of typefaces comes from the the Mergenthaler Linotype Company, a company founded in the United States in 1886 to market the Linotype machine, a system to cast metal type in lines (linecaster) invented by Ottmar Mergenthaler. The company became the world's leading manufacturer of newspaper and book typesetting equipment. The Legibility Group is a series of serif typefaces intended for use in newspapers on Linotype's hot metal typesetting system. They were developed in-house by Linotype's design team, led by Chauncey H. Griffith and released from 1925, when the first member, Ionic No. 5, appeared. The family became a large group due to the creation of slightly different designs for different printing conditions, such as levels of inking used in different newspaper production processes and versions with different x-heights. It consisted of Ionic No. 5, Textype, Excelsior, Opticon, Paragon and Corona. Although not part of the family, Linotype marketed its sans-serif family Metro and slab serif face Memphis as effective complements for headings.

George Bickham the Elder (b. 1684) was one of the most influential English engravers, calligraphers, and writing masters of the eighteenth century. Although he was a capable print engraver, his lasting significance lies in his role in preserving and popularizing English Round Hand (later known as Copperplate script) through beautifully engraved writing manuals. His work shaped business handwriting, penmanship education, typography, and ornamental lettering for generations. He trained as both a writing master and an engraver, two professions that were closely linked before the advent of modern printing. Rather than merely copying handwriting, he engraved elaborate penmanship examples onto copper plates, allowing thousands of identical, highly detailed specimens to be printed. He became renowned for his extraordinary ability to translate handwritten originals directly onto copper plates with exceptional fidelity, a skill admired by his contemporaries.

Compositors & Type: Origin and Use of “Uppercase” and “Lowercase” Carl Shank, CARE Typography Most everyone knows what “uppercase” and “lowercase” letters are. They refer, of course, to our “capital” letters and our “regular” small print. But not many know why or how they came to be known by such terminology. The answer is found in the history and development of typography and printing. “Case” here doesn’t refer to “circumstance” or “condition.” It refers to the wooden trays used to store metal letters, the top case for capital letters (“uppercase”) and the lower case for small letters. Each tray was divided into compartments to hold the type. The lower case also held the punctuation marks and other pieces of type, like “spacers.” The type case was a shallow wooden tray divided into compartments of various sizes. There were about thirty styles of type cases, and some of these were made in different sizes.[1] The most common, or standard, size was 32¼ by 16 inches, outside dimensions, and ⅛ inches deep, inside. One of three traditional plans or schemes for such type cases involved (1) all characters in one case; (2) capitals, small capitals and a few other characters in one case; or (3) the small letters, figures, points, spaces and quads in another case. The two latter cases formed a pair and would nearly always be used together.(See Images) Hand compositors (or “swifts”) would take individual letters, spaces and punctuation marks or other characters from the type case and place them in what was called a composing “stick” in such a manner that when the type characters are properly assembled, they form words, sentences and paragraphs. The work of the press room compositor was divided into two fundamental operations — the “setting” of type and the “unsetting” of type. The former was called composition and the latter, distribution. A visual example of such typesetting can be seen in some of the episodes of The Waltons, an American historical dramatelevision series about a family in rural western Virginia in the Appalachian/Blue Ridge mountains chain, during the economic hardships and mass unemployment of the Great Depression in the 1930s and the subsequent United State home front during World War II in the 1940s. The series aired from 1972 to 1981. John-Boy, a leading character of the series, opened a print shop in a shed by the family home with an old-fashioned mechanical printer that required setting cold metal type from a type case. His brother was the compositor while John-Boy ran the printing machine.

Reading through an old volume of Frederick Nelson Phillips, Inc, Type Faces:With Which We 'Prove It With Proofs' in Typography for Advertisements (New York, 1924), I came across some type that falls outside of the standard typography models, called "vanity type." The term “vanity typography” is not a formal category in typographic history like Old Style, Transitional, Modern, or Sans Serif. Designers typically use the phrase informally to describe typography that draws attention primarily to itself rather than serving the text or reader. Vanity typography occurs when type is used as a display of the designer's skill, fashion, or personal taste rather than to improve communication. Readability is sometimes sacrificed for self-expression and artistic flair. Such type styles use excessive ornamentation, decorative letterforms, overuse of effects like shadows, outlines, gradients and distortions, unusual spacing, and generally typography used to impress rather than inform. Notice in the sample by Phillips, the different "A's," "F's,", "G's," "H's," "L's," "M's," "S's," T's" and "W's." This is not calligraphy lettering, but rather type that could have been used for verses or opening letters to paragraphs or stories.

Puritan Typography Theology Informing Type “Creational realities have not spilled out randomly without purpose; rather, they reflect the wisdom, design, and intention of the good God who made them. It’s our job, then, to observe and learn. . . . And indeed, long before [Jonathan] Edwards began to keep his notebook of earthly pointers to heavenly truths, the seventeenth-century English Puritans were writing lengthy volumes organized around exactly this sort of principle.”[1] “The Puritans were a group of ministers and laypeople within the Church of England who sought to promote Reformed and experiential piety while striving to purify the national church from Roman Catholic influences in doctrine and worship, beginning during the Elizabethan era and continuing as a powerful force until the early eighteenth century. More broadly defined, the Puritan movement included those who were firmly within the Reformed and experiential tradition that flourished not only in sixteenth- and seventeenth-century England, but also well into the eighteenth century north of Hadrian’s Wall (among the Scottish Presbyterians), across the North Sea (among the Dutch Further Reformation divines), and across the Atlantic Ocean (among the New England Puritans and eighteenth-century evangelicals).” [2] Puritan typography flows from Puritan theology. The English Puritans of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries inherited a typographic world shaped by the late Renaissance, the Reformation, and early modern printing. Their type styles were not merely aesthetic choices. Rather, they reflected theology, scholarship, readability, economy, and cultural identity.

The King James Bible (KJV), commissioned by King James 1 in 1604 and published in 1611, has been a profound Bible translation and masterpiece of beauty through the ages. It has been one of the most influential English translations of the Bible. Its history combines politics, religion, and literary achievement in early modern England. It has an elevated, poetic style that influenced many later writers. It has been prized for its literary beauty, historical continuity and memorability in public reading and worship (ChatGPT).

Responding to AI and Digital Babylon H. Carl Shank April 4, 2026 Austin Gravley, a former Social Media Manager of The Gospel Coalition, and now the Director of Youth Ministry at Redeemer Christian Church in Amarillo, TX, is writing a book on AI and the digital revolution taking place. He compares this Digital Babylon and its captivity and its exiles to Christians living under the overwhelming influence of an active anti-Christian developing AI. Piecing together his comments with those of many others on the advancing scene of AI on our lives, several themes come to mind. First, AI is not God. While there are some in the Silicon Valley who might wish or see AI as a unifying, ontological force that can shape or rule our lives — the Super Machine —others remind us that this is only technology. And as advanced as AI is and becomes, God is still sovereignly in control of it and our lives. Jason Thacker, professor of philosophy and ethics at Southern Seminary and Boyce College, writes — “We must engage these issues, rather than respond after their effects are widely felt. But we don’t have to face today or tomorrow with fear. God is sovereign and his Word is sufficient for every good work, so we are able to walk with confidence as we apply his Word to these challenges with wisdom and guided by his Spirit.” ( The Age of AI: Artificial Intelligence and the Future of Humanity , Zondervan, 2020) A recent storm that darkened my community and scuttled Internet services reminded me of that. Even AI data centers, growing to over 3,000 in 2025 nationwide, are not immune to power disruptions and total blackouts. AI pundits may claim to have control procedures to keep the Internet and AI running cannot promise it to be so. We need to keep this in mind in the Digital Babylon age, as was needed to be kept in mind by Israel in the Babylonian Empire age in biblical times. Babylon went through many iterations, but will be defeated by God at the end of the day, as noted in Revelation. Digital Babylon will experience the same demise. This is not prediction, just Bible truth. We as believers need to hold on to such truth. Second, AI is still technology. Indeed, advanced and advancing technology, but not human. Matthew Schultz in a recent mereorthodoxy.com article notes— “Technology has existed since the Garden and is an integral component of our cultural mandate. We should also remember that one of the core distinctions between the Creator and his creatures is that we never create matter but merely (!) rearrange it. This becomes clear whether we consider an ancient farmer in Mesopotamia irrigating a plot of soil, a medieval peasant in Northumbria weaving a basket from flax, or a young musician in London taking the raw outputs of machine sound, adjusting its pitch, volume, and length, and incorporating it into a DAW loop. While there are all sorts of important distinctions and qualifications between pre- and post-industrial craft, there is no metaphysical distance between the two.” ( Artificial Intelligence Is A Technology , Feb. 26, 2026). AI may be the harbinger of a new Industrial Age, but though changes will be major and sometimes severe, the human side of the equation cannot be discounted or counted out. Part of my retired status as a pastor and theologian is that of a typographer restoring old type faces and doing a deep dive into the history of type. Two historical typographical truths stand out. Although the Renaissance age brought movable type from Gutenberg and others into the machine age, the typographical flair of those ancient scribes with pen-drawn exquisite type remained a stylistic standard. The second note is that with the Industrial Age, while affecting the quantity and speed of type development and printing, master type craftsmen rebelled against machine driven type for more organic typefaces. This was seen, for instance, in the type movement spawned by William Morris (1834–1896). William Morris was an Arts & Crafts designer who founded the Kelmscott Press (1891), reviving hand craftsmanship in printing. His work influenced the twentieth century private press and type revival movements. Lettering became a vehicle for breaking convention. Led by figures such as Morris, there was a decided reaction against industrialization, seeing machine-made goods as dehumanizing and ugly. Handcraftmanship, honesty in materials and utility fused with beauty made up much of what was called the Arts & Crafts Movement. That movement was rooted in medieval guild ideals and morality in design. (For an expanded history of type development, see “Advances in Typography: A Historical Sketch — Three Parts” in the blogs by CARE Typography, www.caretypography.com , Nov. 8, 2025, Nov. 18, 2025 and Nov. 20, 2025) Third, AI affects everyone everywhere. Austin Gravely, a former Social Media Manager of The Gospel Coalition, raises and answers the query — “’So what?’, you may think. ‘I’m not an Internet technician. I’m not a fan of AI. I’m not planning to change how I use the Internet. Why does any of this matter to me?’ To put it bluntly: you are naive if you think these disruptions won’t directly affect you, or indirectly affect you through the effect they will have on others. If the iPhone, social media, and AI have taught us anything, it is that you are impacted by these events regardless of whether you participate in them or not.” ( The State of the Internet: 2026 , mereorthodoxy.com, March 30, 2026) He goes on to say — “A changing Internet will change you. It will change you in ways you can see and in ways you can’t. It will change those you live with, work with, play with, build with, and fight with. It will change what is possible, probable, permissible, and prohibited in your life, your vocation, your church, your neighborhood, and any other physical space the Internet touches.” I recall my 99 year old mother who passed away a couple of years ago in a nursing facility. She was one of those survivors of the Great Depression and World War Two who dismissed the first moon landing and had her flat screen TV removed from her room for fear the government was watching. She lasted for nine years in the same private room in a modern nursing center. She was attended by doctors and nurses and staff who used AI on their computers and other care devices. She even had a modern digital phone removed from her room and refused to learn it. While she personally rebelled against her AI driven machine age, she could not escape those who used such technology for her care. We cannot isolate ourselves from AI and its advancing development, no matter how isolated we try to be. Fourth, AI can be either a blessing or a curse. Again, Matthew Schultz notes — “Our task is not to develop a unique theology of AI but to catechize our members into a people who can wield this technology without becoming captive to its internal logic. Like alcohol, artificial intelligence will become a test of character, a dangerous good that divides the foolish from the wise.” He says “Yet the greatest danger is both more pervasive and less obvious: AI is much more likely to be deployed as a multiplicative layer that allows ever more efficient micro-targeting of digital services and physical products by industries that already profit from compulsive behavior. The advent of hyper-personalized, real-time engagement strategies will require legislative safeguards, especially if AI leads to video advertisements generated in real time for an exhaustively mapped individual profile.” We must seek to “humanize” AI and employ it “humanly.” We must resist the phenomenological bent toward unbelief in AI development and pressures. We must once again learn to think critically and pervasively and biblically about AI. Our young people must be taught prescriptive critical thinking practices, rather than unwittingly and ignorantly giving in to what their phones and computers spit out. Church and ministry pastors must pastor rather than let AI bots plan, prepare and even give their sermons. We must learn to smartly negotiate with the “Magnificent Seven”— Apple, Microsoft, Alphabet, Amazon, Meta, Nvidia and Tesla — rather than blindly following their lead. Convenience and speed must not be allowed to overtake and overcome careful, sustained and critical thinking and acting. “To give language to this change, we must take the best of Christian thinking regarding the social and political imaginary and apply it to the economic imaginary of life under the glowing shores of Digital Babylon, and that kind of work cannot be done with quick hot takes. It will take slow, deep, and thoughtful meditation to apply the riches of Christian thought to making sense of the companies that got us here and where they are taking us.” (Austin Gravley, The State of The Internet: 2026 ) I am both excited and wary of AI. I have learned to be much more cautious about social media and the videos and photos and information they give. Much of it has been and is being AI produced and tweaked. Spammers use AI technology to wrest thousands of dollars from unsuspecting senior citizens. Schools are requiring students to turn off their cell phones or “bag” them until after school hours because of the insidious nature of AI generated stuff. I value more and more of a face-to-face approach in teaching and learning and mentoring others. And we must adopt a state of “believing is seeing” rather than a non-Christian scientifically sanctioned “seeing is believing” approach to truth and justice.