Rosettatype’s avatarRosettatype’s Twitter Archive—№ 4,509

      1. …in reply to @hhpapazian
        @hhpapazian @fastuchko Also, is it possible that Bulgarian literature would tell the story in a particular way? Would Czech? That’s why I referred to a more independent source which actually states that Cyrillic and Glagolitic were not distinguished by name as two individual alphabets until later on.
        Permalink On twitter.com Twitter logo Rosettatype’s avatar ❤️ 2 Favorites Mood -2 🙁
    1. …in reply to @rosettatype
      @hhpapazian @fastuchko In other words, according to this text, the names Glagolitic and Cyrillic are later clarifications to distinguish two versions of something that was not distinguished originally.
      Permalink On twitter.com Twitter logo Rosettatype’s avatar Mood -2 🙁
  1. …in reply to @rosettatype
    @hhpapazian @fastuchko And one more fun bit of Glagolitic trivia. Czech type designer Oldřich Menhart wrote an article where he proposes its shapes were inspired by Indian scripts because it visually hangs down from its primary guideline (unlike, e.g., Latin that rests on the baseline).
    On twitter.com Twitter logo Rosettatype’s avatar ♻️ 1 Retweets ❤️ 1 Favorite Mood +6 🙂