• MindTraveller@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    It was probably a secretary or a calligrapher who was deliberately getting artsy with it by choosing a style in which all the letters look the same. Which is a terrible font choice. And writing poorly on purpose is still writing poorly. This secretary chose aesthetics over producing a record that would be readable hundreds of years in the future.

    • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      I’d bet money it’s perfectly legible to sometime familiar with that type of writing. If you look at historical Latin scripts, most of them are barely legible to the untrained eye.

      I also doubt it was done by a calligrapher. If you look at other writing from that era, it all looks pretty similar to that. I think people just had much neater handwriting back then because they got way more practice.

      • MindTraveller@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        It’s not neater, it’s a bunch of random squiggles. Their p doesn’t have a closed loop, and instead makes a detour straight upwards like an l. And their S is pure nonsense.

        The older generation prefers cursive because it’s faster and less effort to write, and they don’t give a shit that it’s harder for everyone else to read. It’s selfishness and it’s rudeness. “Let future generations struggle to read my handwriting, I’m not putting any effort into historic legislature.”