Roman letters

Robert L. Cook, Huger Elliott and A. S. Hill favored classic Roman capitals for memorials. Their articles advocate a design tradition; other pages in the trade literature document block letters, blackletter and ornamental forms. (LM PDF pp.90-99; GMB16 PDF pp.521-523, 669)

Cook and Elliott’s models

Cook preferred a sturdy antique Roman for granite over the delicate forms he associated with Renaissance marble. Elliott used the square and circle to compare letter widths, taking O as a reference rather than making every letter equally wide. These models are starting points for reading their alphabets, not the only historically valid Roman forms. (LM PDF p.91; GMB16 PDF pp.521-522)

Stroke and serif relationships

Both described contrasting heavy and light strokes. Cook favored a vertical axis in round letters; Elliott accepted diagonal stress when C, G, O and Q remained consistent. Elliott also related serif size and direction to the surrounding space. (LM PDF p.94; GMB16 PDF pp.522-523)

Form	Elliott’s comparison
B	Upper bowl smaller than lower.
E	Upper arm shorter than lower; middle arm above center.
H	Crossbar slightly above center.
S and X	Upper part smaller than lower.

These selected features describe Elliott’s model, not a complete alphabet specification. (GMB16 PDF pp.522-523)

Letters, figures and readers

Cook and Elliott discouraged antique V for U in contemporary inscriptions because it could interfere with reading. Cook adapted figures associated with Georgian lettering; Elliott described figures through circles and straight lines. Their treatment of J, U, W and numerals shows a revival adapted to contemporary names and dates. (LM PDF p.99; GMB16 PDF pp.594-595)

Optical corrections explains apparent height and weight. Monumental alphabets locates the plates.

From written form to cut capital

Johnston separates several related but different acts. A simple-written pen curve records a moving tool; a built-up pen capital is drawn by combining strokes; a letter cut in stone must also account for the chisel and the material. The plate compares the first two with a brush-made form. It is a way to see how the tool changes a letter’s structure, not a claim that one tool’s result can be copied unchanged into another. For the pen’s edge and stroke direction, see broad-edged pen.

Fig. 164. Compare the changing outline in the simple-written curves, the built-up pen letter and the brush-made O. Edward Johnston, Writing & Illuminating, & Lettering (1906), ch. XV, printed p. 293 (Archive PDF p. 297). The title page credits the illustrations collectively to Johnston and Noel Rooke; this figure has no separate illustrator credit. Open larger crop.

Gill’s next example compares an A without serifs and one with serifs. It helps explain how the finish at a stroke end can affect the character of a cut letter. Treat this as an observed relationship in the historical example, not a fixed rule for every Roman alphabet.

Fig. 209. Compare the un-serifed A at left with the seriffed A at right. A. E. R. Gill, “Inscriptions in Stone,” in Johnston (1906), printed p. 391 (Archive PDF p. 395). Gill is the chapter contributor; the book credits illustrations collectively to Johnston and Noel Rooke, with no individual figure maker named. Open larger crop.

## See also

• Optical corrections in lettering
• Letter spacing
• Broad-edged pen: how the edge makes the stroke
• Gothic and Old English letters
• Blackletter construction, spacing and page color
• Monumental alphabets
• Wyckoff Colonial (a digitized Colonial Roman)

Sources

• LM p.87–99 (Robert L. Cook).
• GMB16 p.521–523, 594–595 (Huger Elliott); GMB16 p.669 (A. S. Hill).

Source and editorial credit

LM publication record · GMB16 publication record.

This is a modern AI-assisted editorial summary. Named contributors are credited with their specific statements above; unidentified contributors remain unverified. Publication editors are not assumed to have written individual articles. Page references use the private scan; source access, edition and rights limitations are recorded in the linked register.