Paper detail

Classifying the typefaces of the Gutenberg 42-line bible

We have measured the dissimilarities among several printed characters of a single page in the Gutenberg 42-line bible and we prove statistically the existence of several different matrices from which the metal types where constructed. This is in contrast with the prevailing theory, which states that only one matrix per character was used in the printing process of Gutenberg's greatest work. The main mathematical tool for this purpose is cluster analysis, combined with a statistical test for outliers. We carry out the research with two letters, i and a. In the first case, an exact clustering method is employed; in the second, with more specimens to be classified, we resort to an approximate agglomerative clustering method. The results show that the letters form clusters according to their shape, with significant shape differences among clusters, and allow to conclude, with a very small probability of error, that indeed the metal types used to print them were cast from several different matrices. Mathematics Subject Classification: 62H30

preprint2010arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.