I noticed this discrepancy as well and was going to ask Rich about this... Rich?
for those following along, the type in question:
http://www.p22.com/lanston/products/garamont.html

In Goudy’s own words:

“I have the four-volume edition of Claudin’s _Monumental Histoire de l’Imprimerie en France au XV et XVI Siecle_ in which the introduction is set in a large letter (about 24-point according to modern measurements) which was attributed to Claude Garamond (1540). I made the drawings from this type.... I suggested the name “Garamont” instead of “Garamond,” as that name would show at once that it was a Monotype face, not to be confused with the faces of othes concerns also following the same source. The name was found by me in _Notice sur les Types Etrangers du Specimen de l’Imprimerie Royale_ about the type “attribuait a Garamont.....”

But thanks for bringing this up. I have to reprint a book I published in 1986 from repros of the metal Garamont, which I no longer have. I didn’t realize this face was part of the P22 Lanston offerings. My experience with digital Lanston Type is that they are right on the money replications of the Lanston Monotype offerings.

Gerald

but how long were the Jannon types misattributed? Goudy could have in good faith believed that the letters he based his type on were by Garamond and yet they could have actually been based on Jannon’s designs. I just cracked Elements, and there is a comparison between the actual Garamond style and the Jannon style and Lanston Garamont definately seems to follow the Jannon vein.

Well, assuming the date of Goudy’s reference is correct (1540), Garamond died in 1561 (or so). Jannon is a bit later. Original sources, from the horse’s mouth, so to speak, are often more reliable than that coming from folks known to have an “agenda.” Other than that, don’t know.

Gerald

From Anatomy of a Typeface (Walter Tracy):

“In 1920 Frederic W.Goudy became art director of the Lanston Monotype Machine Company, and for the first type under his new reponsibility he turned to his own conception of the Garamond design. He elected to follow the Jannon type, altough hist interpretation deiffered in a number of respects from that of ATF.”

However, the only sight of his characteristics is enough to tell. Isnt´ it?

I tried to add to the Garamond entry the mention of Stempel Garamond under the Garamond based garamonds, but when I tried to edit the text it happened to be there (it just doesn´t appears) so as I was scared to break something I left it that way, still it doesn´t appear.

Héctor

i think i was able to fix it... anything else? (i know i was having problems making changes on Sunday, but i hadn’t touched anything about Stempel)

Well, as Hannibal Lector and William of Occam have said, in their differing ways. . . . simplicity.

Gerald

Thanks that clears it up. The book Goudy was working from was the one that was discovered (in 1926, so after Goudy had done his work) to misattribute the font. So it seems clear: Garamont is a Jannon, though Goudy would have thought when he made it (and probably afterwards, I don’t get the feeling he was vastly concerned about these points) that it was Garamond 1540 ... In fact it is Jannon, 1620s or so.

Goudy’s attribution was from his “Half Century of Type Design” in 1945. This wouldn’t be the only factual error by Goudy in his Autotypography.

Even decades after Warde’s exposition (which some people actually attribute to Bullen to some extent) the occasional flashes of apologism or downright looking-the-other-way can be quite funny. Check out Simoncini’s description of their Garamond:
http://www.myfonts.com/fonts/linotype/simoncini-garamond/

hhp

Warde’s exposition on Garamond? That was inspired by Morison not Bullen.

I’ve heard the theory that Bullen planted the doubt in Warde’s head
when she was working for him (so even before she moved to Monotype).

hhp

Don’t know who planted what in Warde’s head or wherever, but ultimately, she was the only one who was willing to tell the truth, about any of it.

Gerald

Does that mean you think it wouldn’t have ended up in the pages of The Fleuron if she wasn’t the editor’s hottie?

hhp

Hrant, you just wanted to take my name off the typophile opening page. Um, wasn’t Warde everyone’s hottie? Nevertheless, she played the game better than anyone else.

Gerald