Dividing Monosyllables.—In simple writing—the beauty of which depends on freedom rather than on precision—I think that even such an awkward word as “through” should not be broken. If the space at the end of a line is insufficient, it should be left blank, or be filled in with a dash of the pen. But in the case of words in LARGE CAPITALS, especially in title-pages and the like, where spacing [p259] is more difficult, and smooth reading less essential, any word may be divided at any point if the necessity is sufficiently obvious. But (even when the division is syllabic) breaking words, as interfering with the ease of reading, may often be avoided with advantage, and divisions which give accidental words, especially when they are objectionable, as [p260] “TH-ROUGH,” or “NEIGH-BOUR,” should not be allowed. Among other ways of dealing with small spaces, without breaking words, are the following:—
Ending with Smaller Letters.—The scribe is always at liberty to compress his writing slightly, provided he does not spoil its readableness or beauty. Occasionally, without harming either of these, a marked difference in size of letter may be allowed; one or more words, or a part of one, or a single letter, being made smaller (a, b, fig. [153]; see also [Plate V.]).
Monogrammatic Forms, &c.—In any kind of lettering, but more particularly in the case of capitals, where the given space is insufficient for the given capitals, monogrammatic forms resembling the ordinary diphthong Æ may be used; or the stem of one letter may be drawn out, above or below, and formed into another (c, fig. [153]).
Linking.—Letters which are large enough may be linked or looped together, or one letter may be set inside another, or free-stem letters may be drawn up above the line (d, fig. [153], but see p. [26]).
Tying up.—One or more words at the end of a line of writing—particularly in poetry (see p. [95])—may be “tied up,” i.e. be written above or below the line, with a pen stroke to connect them to it (fig. [67]).
Care must be taken that none of these methods lead to confusion in the reading. Their “Quaintness”—as it is sometimes called—is only pleasing when their contrivance is obviously made necessary.
“MASSED WRITING” & “FINE WRITING”
We may distinguish two characteristic modes of treating an inscription, in which the treatment of the letter is bound up with the treatment of the spacing (fig. [154]). [p262]