Printing types of Pierre Haultin (ca.1510-87) Part I: Roman types
Bibliographic record
Abstract
[Though less famous than his contemporaries Garamont and Granjon, Pierre Haultin (ca.I5I0-87), ranks among the better French type designers of the sixteenth century. He was instrumental in the Calvinist publishing campaign of the I550s and in developing a sturdier and more economical design of roman type. His types remained popular unto the end of the eighteenth century, a few even unto the first quarter of the nineteenth century. This paper attempts to describe the typefaces he may have cut and to assemble the evidence for attributing them. It describes 39 typefaces, viz. I5 romans (§§ I-I5) in a first part, and 8 italics (§§ I6-23), 4 Greeks (§§ 24-7), and I2 musics (§§ 28-39) in a second part., Though less famous than his contemporaries Garamont and Granjon, Pierre Haultin (ca.I5I0-87), ranks among the better French type designers of the sixteenth century. He was instrumental in the Calvinist publishing campaign of the I550s and in developing a sturdier and more economical design of roman type. His types remained popular unto the end of the eighteenth century, a few even unto the first quarter of the nineteenth century. This paper attempts to describe the typefaces he may have cut and to assemble the evidence for attributing them. It describes 39 typefaces, viz. I5 romans (§§ I-I5) in a first part, and 8 italics (§§ I6-23), 4 Greeks (§§ 24-7), and I2 musics (§§ 28-39) in a second part.]
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.022 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".