Unfortunately the Eye article doesn't answers my questions. Although, having a second look, it does have a specimen of the type used before Times Roman. I'll try posting this on the identification board.

Thanks

I have a lot of that information somewhere in my "newspaper" folder, I just need to find the time to go through it... But you would certainly do well to get your hands on the 6-volume "History of the Times" published by the Macmillan Company in 1935.

More soon... hopefully.

hhp

Far as I know they used a type simply called Times Roman, which was a modern typeface. The name Times New Roman came after Times Roman.

I think Times Roman and Times New Roman are essentially the same typeface, the first being made by Linotype and the second Monotype. This is the impression given by the Eye article.

Morison wrote several good pieces in addition to the History Hrant mentioned, Printing the Times since 1785, 'The Times New Roman: cutting and designing the new type' in The Times house journal, and Memorandum on a Proposal to Revise the Typography of 'The Times'. See also Tracy's article in Letters of Credit and John Dreyfus, 'The evolution of Times New Roman' in Penrose annual 66.

In short, The Times had used a Caslon until the late 1800s, when it switched to a modern called simply "Times Roman". (Richard, you are of course correct in the current usage of the term, more on which see Charles Bigelow's posting to comp.fonts.)

Both the Linotype and Monotype versions were used, Monotype for the text and Linotype for headlines.

I don't think the newest members of the Times lineage are commercially available. Just Times (New) Roman, and Times Europa. See also John Berry's article 'Times Classic: a new type for the old Times' in Contemporary newspaper design, and the notes on Briem Times, which is the "new" name for Times Millennium.