Those glyphs look heavily eroded.

Indeed. The particular printing of the book that I scanned this from has a pretty low production quality in general. Regardless, some of these characters are pretty distinct and should be easily recognizable if you are familiar with the typeface (which, unfortunately, I am not).

I am thoroughly convinced that it is indeed a typeface though, and not handlettering (I've even gone to the length of doing overlay comparisons of the duplicate letters to check for consistency).

If you consider this being x-number of generations away from the original, I might guess Perpetua.

Just out of curiosity, how do typefaces like this become eroded? I imagine it's got something to do wth working with copies instead of masters but I'm unsure of the details. I really like the uniform way it's eroded, not so much the subject matter of the book...

--N

Another possibility: Gill's Lapidary (in a pre-digital version, of course).

Skylar

Lapidary Bitstream's version of Perpetua, but I can see some differences. Specifally the lowercase-b has more of a curve in the base which matches more closely the cover. Could be a better match.

The "erosion" happens when they duplicate the artwork multiples times. It is similar to what happens when you scan a transparency, output that to paper, scan the print and then output that to film. You 4 generations away from the original.

How ironic it would be if it were an Eric Gill typeface!
Though, on second thought, maybe not... he did do a lot of stuff that might be more easily considered in line with LaVeyan Satanism than with Catholicism!

It definitely has a Gill flavor to it (I had originally looked at Golden Cockerel). Up until now, Perpetua / Lapidary are the closest things I've seen, but none of the digital versions quite cut it, even with the changes from erosion considered.

Maybe it's just a pre-digital version that was forsaken at the cross of analog and digital technologies. Anyone have a pre-1969 type specimen book with a matching version of Perpetua?

If it's 1969 it's probably a Compugraphic rip-off.

[[http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3234/3103576924_abec904044_b.jpg|Comparisons]]

Nick Sherman said: "How ironic it would be if it were an Eric Gill typeface!
Though, on second thought, maybe not... he did do a lot of stuff that might be more easily considered in line with LaVeyan Satanism than with Catholicism!"

Well, having sex with animals is a total no-go in LaVey's Satanism. LaVey was pretty free-for-all as long as there was consent. Animals cannot give consent, therefore **** is not approved...

**** your kids is a no-go as well... "Satanism does not advocate rape, child molesting, sexual defilement of animals, or any other form of sexual activity which entails the participation of those who are unwilling or whose innocence or naivete would allow them to be intimidated or misguided into doing something against their wishes." - The Satanic Bible, pg 70.

Considering the rampant pedophilia, animal abuse, etc. etc. that has been a staple of Catholicism, I'd say he fit right in.