205TF – Immortel

TypefaceImmortel

DesignerClément Le Tulle-Neyret

Release 2021

Fonts In Use

Article

Specimen

Immortel, designed by Clément Le Tulle-Neyret, is a type family with four variants developed according to the Hippocratic theory of humors that explains these latter through the presence of one of the four principal fluids. Each one is the cause behind the development of a character trait: phlegm represents a lymphatic, sluggish, slow character (Immortel Infra); yellow bile, an angry and prideful character (Immortel Colera); blood, a jovial and warm character (Immortel Vena); and black bile provokes hopelessness and melancholy (Immortel Acedia).

This type family is envisaged like a human being, able to reveal different temperaments through the forms that it adopts. Each variant can be substituted for another without causing any change in the bulkiness of the text, as the metric system, which provides a structural link between the variants—set width, x-heights, the length of ascenders and descenders, height of capitals—is constant.

Typographically, each variant is inspired by the work of type designers, following the course of history:

Immortel Infra finds its source in the work of Robert Granjon, a typeface engraver from the 16th century;

Immortel Colera in the work of Jean Jannon, an engraver from the 17th century;
Immortel Vena is influenced by the work of Jacques-François Rosart, an engraver from the 18th century;

Immortel Acedia takes its inspiration from the engraving Melencolia I by Albrecht Dürer (1514) and attempts a synthesis between two traces of a priori opposing tools, one made by the flat tip and the other by the narrow point. In this sense it is closer to a 21st century typeface.

Immortel Infra and Vena, variants intended to be used with running text, possess two italics: the first, called “Median”, slightly slanted, is ideal for composing long text; the second, called “Italic”, with its very sharp angle and ornate instrokes and terminals, is ideal for emphasis.

To best serve running text, the Infra and Vena variants possess two grades: this signifies that these two variants have two slightly different weights that conserve the same set width so as to have a more or less dark text color according to the page layout and/or the sensitivity of the user. Grade 2 can also be used to compose knocked out text on a dark background.

This type family began life in October 2016 in the Atelier national de recherche typographique (ANRT, Nancy – France). It development was pursued thanks to the support of the Centre national des arts plastiques (CNAP) in 2018.

16 Styles

Infra

Colera

Vena

Acedia

6 Variables

Infra

Vena

Infra G2 Median

Sample

Phlegmatic The doctrine of the four humours. In the order stated above—not necessarily following one another, but often existing side by side—these various meanings evolved in the course of a development covering more than two thousand years. Although new meanings emerged, old meanings did not give way to them; in short, it was a case not of decay and metamorphosis, but of parallel survival. The original basis of the different meanings was the quite literal conception of a concrete, visible and tangible part of the body, the “black bile” (atra bilis), which, together with the phlegm, the yellow (or “red”) bile, and the blood, constituted the Four Humours. These humours corresponded, it was held, to the cosmic elements and to the divisions of time; they controlled the whole existence and behaviour of mankind, and, according to the manner in which they were combined, determined the character of the individual. “Sunt enim quattuor humores in homine, qui imitantur diversa elementa; crescunt in diversis temporibus, regnant in diversis aetatibus. Sanguis imitatur aerem, crescit in vere, regnat in pueritia. Cholera imitator ignem, crescit in aestate, regnat in adolescentia. Melancholia imitatur terram, crescit in autumno, regnat in maturitate. Phlegma imitatur aquam, crescit in hieme, regnat in senectute. Hi cum nec plus nec minus iusto exuberant, viget homo.” In these clear, terse sentences of an early medieval natural philosopher, we have the ancient doctrine of the Four Humours. This system was destined to dominate the whole trend of physiology and psychology almost until the present day; for what the “heterodox” schools of antiquity had opposed to humoral pathology was either forgotten or else merged into the orthodox doctrine by the second-century eclectics, especially Galen. In the same way Paracelsus’s objections went long unheard. This system can be accounted for only by the combination of three very ancient (and, in part at least, specifically Greek) principles: 1. The search for simple primary elements or qualities, to which the complex and apparently irrational structure of both macrocosm and microcosm could be directly traced. 2. The urge to find a numerical expression for this complex structure of bodily and spiritual existence. 3. The theory of harmony, symmetry, isonomy, or whatever other name men may have chosen to express that perfect proportion in parts, in materials, or in faculties, which Greek thought down to Plotinus always regarded as essential to any value, moral, aesthetic or hygienic. In seeking, then, to ascertain the origin of humoralism, we must go back to the Pythagoreans, not only because the veneration of number in general attained its highest expression in Pythagorean philosophy, but more particularly because the Pythagoreans regarded the number four as specially significant. They used to swear by four, “which holds the root and source of eternal nature”; and not only nature in general, but rational man in particular, seemed to them governed by four principles, located in the brain, the heart, the navel and the phallus respectively. Even the soul was later on envisaged as fourfold, enclosing intellect, understanding, opinion and perception. The Pythagoreans themselves did not evolve a doctrine of four humours, but they prepared the ground by postulating a series of tetradic categories (such as, for instance, those already mentioned; earth, air, fire and water; spring, summer, autumn and winter). In this system, once it was evolved, the four humours could easily be accommodated. Above all, they defined health as the equilibrium of different qualities, and sickness as the predominance of one—a concept truly decisive for humoralism proper. Alcmaeon of Croton, a Pythagorean doctor who lived about 500 B. C., declared that “equality of rights between the qualities moist, dry, cold, hot, bitter, sweet, and the rest, preserved health, but the rule of one among them produces sickness”; and he condensed the notion of health into the formula “a well-balanced mixture of the qualities”. Whereas Alcmaeon left indefinite the number and nature of the qualities whose isonomy constituted health (“moist, dry, cold, hot, bitter, sweet, and the rest”), Philolaus took a step forward towards humoralisrn by describing the number four as “the principle of health”. The emergence of a thoroughgoing doctrine of humoralism required, however, the fulfilment of three further conditions. First, the Pythagoreans had venerated four as being a perfect number. It was now also given a physical content; this was achieved when the Pythagorean number symbolism was transformed into a doctrine of the cosmic elements. Secondly, each of these four elements had to be interpreted in terms of a quality which established, as it were, an apparent link between the original elements and the corresponding components of the human body which could not, in their empirical actuality, be regarded as pure earth, pure water, and so on. Thirdly, certain real substances which appeared to correspond to those elements and qualities had to be found in the human body, for only then could the speculations of natural philosophy be reconciled with the empirical evidence of medicine and physiology.Phlegmatic

Infra G2 Roman

Sample

The doctrine of the four humours. In the order stated above—not necessarily following one another, but often existing side by side—these various meanings evolved in the course of a development covering more than two thousand years. Although new meanings emerged, old meanings did not give way to them; in short, it was a case not of decay and metamorphosis, but of parallel survival. The original basis of the different meanings was the quite literal conception of a concrete, visible and tangible part of the body, the “black bile” (atra bilis), which, together with the phlegm, the yellow (or “red”) bile, and the blood, constituted the Four Humours. These humours corresponded, it was held, to the cosmic elements and to the divisions of time; they controlled the whole existence and behaviour of mankind, and, according to the manner in which they were combined, determined the character of the individual. “Sunt enim quattuor humores in homine, qui imitantur diversa elementa; crescunt in diversis temporibus, regnant in diversis aetatibus. Sanguis imitatur aerem, crescit in vere, regnat in pueritia. Cholera imitator ignem, crescit in aestate, regnat in adolescentia. Melancholia imitatur terram, crescit in autumno, regnat in maturitate. Phlegma imitatur aquam, crescit in hieme, regnat in senectute. Hi cum nec plus nec minus iusto exuberant, viget homo.” In these clear, terse sentences of an early medieval natural philosopher, we have the ancient doctrine of the Four Humours. This system was destined to dominate the whole trend of physiology and psychology almost until the present day; for what the “heterodox” schools of antiquity had opposed to humoral pathology was either forgotten or else merged into the orthodox doctrine by the second-century eclectics, especially Galen. In the same way Paracelsus’s objections went long unheard. This system can be accounted for only by the combination of three very ancient (and, in part at least, specifically Greek) principles: 1. The search for simple primary elements or qualities, to which the complex and apparently irrational structure of both macrocosm and microcosm could be directly traced. 2. The urge to find a numerical expression for this complex structure of bodily and spiritual existence. 3. The theory of harmony, symmetry, isonomy, or whatever other name men may have chosen to express that perfect proportion in parts, in materials, or in faculties, which Greek thought down to Plotinus always regarded as essential to any value, moral, aesthetic or hygienic. In seeking, then, to ascertain the origin of humoralism, we must go back to the Pythagoreans, not only because the veneration of number in general attained its highest expression in Pythagorean philosophy, but more particularly because the Pythagoreans regarded the number four as specially significant. They used to swear by four, “which holds the root and source of eternal nature”; and not only nature in general, but rational man in particular, seemed to them governed by four principles, located in the brain, the heart, the navel and the phallus respectively. Even the soul was later on envisaged as fourfold, enclosing intellect, understanding, opinion and perception. The Pythagoreans themselves did not evolve a doctrine of four humours, but they prepared the ground by postulating a series of tetradic categories (such as, for instance, those already mentioned; earth, air, fire and water; spring, summer, autumn and winter). In this system, once it was evolved, the four humours could easily be accommodated. Above all, they defined health as the equilibrium of different qualities, and sickness as the predominance of one—a concept truly decisive for humoralism proper. Alcmaeon of Croton, a Pythagorean doctor who lived about 500 B. C., declared that “equality of rights between the qualities moist, dry, cold, hot, bitter, sweet, and the rest, preserved health, but the rule of one among them produces sickness”; and he condensed the notion of health into the formula “a well-balanced mixture of the qualities”. Whereas Alcmaeon left indefinite the number and nature of the qualities whose isonomy constituted health (“moist, dry, cold, hot, bitter, sweet, and the rest”), Philolaus took a step forward towards humoralisrn by describing the number four as “the principle of health”. The emergence of a thoroughgoing doctrine of humoralism required, however, the fulfilment of three further conditions. First, the Pythagoreans had venerated four as being a perfect number. It was now also given a physical content; this was achieved when the Pythagorean number symbolism was transformed into a doctrine of the cosmic elements. Secondly, each of these four elements had to be interpreted in terms of a quality which established, as it were, an apparent link between the original elements and the corresponding components of the human body which could not, in their empirical actuality, be regarded as pure earth, pure water, and so on. Thirdly, certain real substances which appeared to correspond to those elements and qualities had to be found in the human body, for only then could the speculations of natural philosophy be reconciled with the empirical evidence of medicine and physiology.The doctrine

Colera Italic

Sample

The “black bile” (atra bilis) In the order stated above—not necessarily following one another, but often existing side by side—these various meanings evolved in the course of a development covering more than two thousand years. Although new meanings emerged, old meanings did not give way to them; in short, it was a case not of decay and metamorphosis, but of parallel survival. The original basis of the different meanings was the quite literal conception of a concrete, visible and tangible part of the body, the “black bile” (atra bilis), which, together with the phlegm, the yellow (or “red”) bile, and the blood, constituted the Four Humours. These humours corresponded, it was held, to the cosmic elements and to the divisions of time; they controlled the whole existence and behaviour of mankind, and, according to the manner in which they were combined, determined the character of the individual. “Sunt enim quattuor humores in homine, qui imitantur diversa elementa; crescunt in diversis temporibus, regnant in diversis aetatibus. Sanguis imitatur aerem, crescit in vere, regnat in pueritia. Cholera imitator ignem, crescit in aestate, regnat in adolescentia. Melancholia imitatur terram, crescit in autumno, regnat in maturitate. Phlegma imitatur aquam, crescit in hieme, regnat in senectute. Hi cum nec plus nec minus iusto exuberant, viget homo.” In these clear, terse sentences of an early medieval natural philosopher, we have the ancient doctrine of the Four Humours. This system was destined to dominate the whole trend of physiology and psychology almost until the present day; for what the “heterodox” schools of antiquity had opposed to humoral pathology was either forgotten or else merged into the orthodox doctrine by the second-century eclectics, especially Galen. In the same way Paracelsus’s objections went long unheard. This system can be accounted for only by the combination of three very ancient (and, in part at least, specifically Greek) principles: 1. The search for simple primary elements or qualities, to which the complex and apparently irrational structure of both macrocosm and microcosm could be directly traced. 2. The urge to find a numerical expression for this complex structure of bodily and spiritual existence. 3. The theory of harmony, symmetry, isonomy, or whatever other name men may have chosen to express that perfect proportion in parts, in materials, or in faculties, which Greek thought down to Plotinus always regarded as essential to any value, moral, aesthetic or hygienic. In seeking, then, to ascertain the origin of humoralism, we must go back to the Pythagoreans, not only because the veneration of number in general attained its highest expression in Pythagorean philosophy, but more particularly because the Pythagoreans regarded the number four as specially significant. They used to swear by four, “which holds the root and source of eternal nature”; and not only nature in general, but rational man in particular, seemed to them governed by four principles, located in the brain, the heart, the navel and the phallus respectively. Even the soul was later on envisaged as fourfold, enclosing intellect, understanding, opinion and perception. The Pythagoreans themselves did not evolve a doctrine of four humours, but they prepared the ground by postulating a series of tetradic categories (such as, for instance, those already mentioned; earth, air, fire and water; spring, summer, autumn and winter). In this system, once it was evolved, the four humours could easily be accommodated. Above all, they defined health as the equilibrium of different qualities, and sickness as the predominance of one—a concept truly decisive for humoralism proper. Alcmaeon of Croton, a Pythagorean doctor who lived about 500 B. C., declared that “equality of rights between the qualities moist, dry, cold, hot, bitter, sweet, and the rest, preserved health, but the rule of one among them produces sickness”; and he condensed the notion of health into the formula “a well-balanced mixture of the qualities”. Whereas Alcmaeon left indefinite the number and nature of the qualities whose isonomy constituted health (“moist, dry, cold, hot, bitter, sweet, and the rest”), Philolaus took a step forward towards humoralisrn by describing the number four as “the principle of health”. The emergence of a thoroughgoing doctrine of humoralism required, however, the fulfilment of three further conditions. First, the Pythagoreans had venerated four as being a perfect number. It was now also given a physical content; this was achieved when the Pythagorean number symbolism was transformed into a doctrine of the cosmic elements. Secondly, each of these four elements had to be interpreted in terms of a quality which established, as it were, an apparent link between the original elements and the corresponding components of the human body which could not, in their empirical actuality, be regarded as pure earth, pure water, and so on. Thirdly, certain real substances which appeared to correspond to those elements and qualities had to be found in the human body, for only then could the speculations of natural philosophy be reconciled with the empirical evidence of medicine and physiology.The “black bile” (atra bilis)

Colera Roman

Sample

Whereas Alcmaeon left indefinite the number and nature of the qualities whose isonomy constituted health (“moist, dry, cold, hot, bitter, sweet, and the rest”), Philolaus took a step forward towards humoralisrn by describing the number four as “the principle of health”. The emergence of a thoroughgoing doctrine of humoralism required, however, the fulfilment of three further conditions. First, the Pythagoreans had venerated four as being a perfect number. It was now also given a physical content; this was achieved when the Pythagorean number symbolism was transformed into a doctrine of the cosmic elements. Secondly, each of these four elements had to be interpreted in terms of a quality which established, as it were, an apparent link between the original elements and the corresponding components of the human body which could not, in their empirical actuality, be regarded as pure earth, pure water, and so on. Thirdly, certain real substances which appeared to correspond to those elements and qualities had to be found in the human body, for only then could the speculations of natural philosophy be reconciled with the empirical evidence of medicine and physiology. In the order stated above—not necessarily following one another, but often existing side by side—these various meanings evolved in the course of a development covering more than two thousand years. Although new meanings emerged, old meanings did not give way to them; in short, it was a case not of decay and metamorphosis, but of parallel survival. The original basis of the different meanings was the quite literal conception of a concrete, visible and tangible part of the body, the “black bile” (atra bilis), which, together with the phlegm, the yellow (or “red”) bile, and the blood, constituted the Four Humours. These humours corresponded, it was held, to the cosmic elements and to the divisions of time; they controlled the whole existence and behaviour of mankind, and, according to the manner in which they were combined, determined the character of the individual. “Sunt enim quattuor humores in homine, qui imitantur diversa elementa; crescunt in diversis temporibus, regnant in diversis aetatibus. Sanguis imitatur aerem, crescit in vere, regnat in pueritia. Cholera imitator ignem, crescit in aestate, regnat in adolescentia. Melancholia imitatur terram, crescit in autumno, regnat in maturitate. Phlegma imitatur aquam, crescit in hieme, regnat in senectute. Hi cum nec plus nec minus iusto exuberant, viget homo.” In these clear, terse sentences of an early medieval natural philosopher, we have the ancient doctrine of the Four Humours. This system was destined to dominate the whole trend of physiology and psychology almost until the present day; for what the “heterodox” schools of antiquity had opposed to humoral pathology was either forgotten or else merged into the orthodox doctrine by the second-century eclectics, especially Galen. In the same way Paracelsus’s objections went long unheard. This system can be accounted for only by the combination of three very ancient (and, in part at least, specifically Greek) principles: 1. The search for simple primary elements or qualities, to which the complex and apparently irrational structure of both macrocosm and microcosm could be directly traced. 2. The urge to find a numerical expression for this complex structure of bodily and spiritual existence. 3. The theory of harmony, symmetry, isonomy, or whatever other name men may have chosen to express that perfect proportion in parts, in materials, or in faculties, which Greek thought down to Plotinus always regarded as essential to any value, moral, aesthetic or hygienic. In seeking, then, to ascertain the origin of humoralism, we must go back to the Pythagoreans, not only because the veneration of number in general attained its highest expression in Pythagorean philosophy, but more particularly because the Pythagoreans regarded the number four as specially significant. They used to swear by four, “which holds the root and source of eternal nature”; and not only nature in general, but rational man in particular, seemed to them governed by four principles, located in the brain, the heart, the navel and the phallus respectively. Even the soul was later on envisaged as fourfold, enclosing intellect, understanding, opinion and perception. The Pythagoreans themselves did not evolve a doctrine of four humours, but they prepared the ground by postulating a series of tetradic categories (such as, for instance, those already mentioned; earth, air, fire and water; spring, summer, autumn and winter). In this system, once it was evolved, the four humours could easily be accommodated. Above all, they defined health as the equilibrium of different qualities, and sickness as the predominance of one—a concept truly decisive for humoralism proper. Alcmaeon of Croton, a Pythagorean doctor who lived about 500 B. C., declared that “equality of rights between the qualities moist, dry, cold, hot, bitter, sweet, and the rest, preserved health, but the rule of one among them produces sickness”; and he condensed the notion of health into the formula “a well-balanced mixture of the qualities”. Whereas Alcmaeon left indefinite the number and nature of the qualities whose isonomy constituted health (“moist, dry, cold, hot, bitter, sweet, and the rest”), Philolaus took a step forward towards humoralisrn by describing the number four as “the principle of health”. The emergence of a thoroughgoing doctrine of humoralism required, however, the fulfilment of three further conditions. First, the Pythagoreans had venerated four as being a perfect number. It was now also given a physical content; this was achieved when the Pythagorean number symbolism was transformed into a doctrine of the cosmic elements. Secondly, each of these four elements had to be interpreted in terms of a quality which established, as it were, an apparent link between the original elements and the corresponding components of the human body which could not, in their empirical actuality, be regarded as pure earth, pure water, and so on. Thirdly, certain real substances which appeared to correspond to those elements and qualities had to be found in the human body, for only then could the speculations of natural philosophy be reconciled with the empirical evidence of medicine and physiology.Whereas

Vena G2 Italic

Sample

Enthousiaste The doctrine of the four humours. In the order stated above—not necessarily following one another, but often existing side by side—these various meanings evolved in the course of a development covering more than two thousand years. Although new meanings emerged, old meanings did not give way to them; in short, it was a case not of decay and metamorphosis, but of parallel survival. The original basis of the different meanings was the quite literal conception of a concrete, visible and tangible part of the body, the “black bile” (atra bilis), which, together with the phlegm, the yellow (or “red”) bile, and the blood, constituted the Four Humours. These humours corresponded, it was held, to the cosmic elements and to the divisions of time; they controlled the whole existence and behaviour of mankind, and, according to the manner in which they were combined, determined the character of the individual. “Sunt enim quattuor humores in homine, qui imitantur diversa elementa; crescunt in diversis temporibus, regnant in diversis aetatibus. Sanguis imitatur aerem, crescit in vere, regnat in pueritia. Cholera imitator ignem, crescit in aestate, regnat in adolescentia. Melancholia imitatur terram, crescit in autumno, regnat in maturitate. Phlegma imitatur aquam, crescit in hieme, regnat in senectute. Hi cum nec plus nec minus iusto exuberant, viget homo.” In these clear, terse sentences of an early medieval natural philosopher, we have the ancient doctrine of the Four Humours. This system was destined to dominate the whole trend of physiology and psychology almost until the present day; for what the “heterodox” schools of antiquity had opposed to humoral pathology was either forgotten or else merged into the orthodox doctrine by the second-century eclectics, especially Galen. In the same way Paracelsus’s objections went long unheard. This system can be accounted for only by the combination of three very ancient (and, in part at least, specifically Greek) principles: 1. The search for simple primary elements or qualities, to which the complex and apparently irrational structure of both macrocosm and microcosm could be directly traced. 2. The urge to find a numerical expression for this complex structure of bodily and spiritual existence. 3. The theory of harmony, symmetry, isonomy, or whatever other name men may have chosen to express that perfect proportion in parts, in materials, or in faculties, which Greek thought down to Plotinus always regarded as essential to any value, moral, aesthetic or hygienic. In seeking, then, to ascertain the origin of humoralism, we must go back to the Pythagoreans, not only because the veneration of number in general attained its highest expression in Pythagorean philosophy, but more particularly because the Pythagoreans regarded the number four as specially significant. They used to swear by four, “which holds the root and source of eternal nature”; and not only nature in general, but rational man in particular, seemed to them governed by four principles, located in the brain, the heart, the navel and the phallus respectively. Even the soul was later on envisaged as fourfold, enclosing intellect, understanding, opinion and perception. The Pythagoreans themselves did not evolve a doctrine of four humours, but they prepared the ground by postulating a series of tetradic categories (such as, for instance, those already mentioned; earth, air, fire and water; spring, summer, autumn and winter). In this system, once it was evolved, the four humours could easily be accommodated. Above all, they defined health as the equilibrium of different qualities, and sickness as the predominance of one—a concept truly decisive for humoralism proper. Alcmaeon of Croton, a Pythagorean doctor who lived about 500 B. C., declared that “equality of rights between the qualities moist, dry, cold, hot, bitter, sweet, and the rest, preserved health, but the rule of one among them produces sickness”; and he condensed the notion of health into the formula “a well-balanced mixture of the qualities”. Whereas Alcmaeon left indefinite the number and nature of the qualities whose isonomy constituted health (“moist, dry, cold, hot, bitter, sweet, and the rest”), Philolaus took a step forward towards humoralisrn by describing the number four as “the principle of health”. The emergence of a thoroughgoing doctrine of humoralism required, however, the fulfilment of three further conditions. First, the Pythagoreans had venerated four as being a perfect number. It was now also given a physical content; this was achieved when the Pythagorean number symbolism was transformed into a doctrine of the cosmic elements. Secondly, each of these four elements had to be interpreted in terms of a quality which established, as it were, an apparent link between the original elements and the corresponding components of the human body which could not, in their empirical actuality, be regarded as pure earth, pure water, and so on. Thirdly, certain real substances which appeared to correspond to those elements and qualities had to be found in the human body, for only then could the speculations of natural philosophy be reconciled with the empirical evidence of medicine and physiology.Enthousiaste

Vena G2 Roman

Sample

Acedia Roman

Sample

Melancholia imitatur In the order stated above—not necessarily following one another, but often existing side by side—these various meanings evolved in the course of a development covering more than two thousand years. Although new meanings emerged, old meanings did not give way to them; in short, it was a case not of decay and metamorphosis, but of parallel survival. The original basis of the different meanings was the quite literal conception of a concrete, visible and tangible part of the body, the “black bile” (atra bilis), which, together with the phlegm, the yellow (or “red”) bile, and the blood, constituted the Four Humours. These humours corresponded, it was held, to the cosmic elements and to the divisions of time; they controlled the whole existence and behaviour of mankind, and, according to the manner in which they were combined, determined the character of the individual. “Sunt enim quattuor humores in homine, qui imitantur diversa elementa; crescunt in diversis temporibus, regnant in diversis aetatibus. Sanguis imitatur aerem, crescit in vere, regnat in pueritia. Cholera imitator ignem, crescit in aestate, regnat in adolescentia. Melancholia imitatur terram, crescit in autumno, regnat in maturitate. Phlegma imitatur aquam, crescit in hieme, regnat in senectute. Hi cum nec plus nec minus iusto exuberant, viget homo.” In these clear, terse sentences of an early medieval natural philosopher, we have the ancient doctrine of the Four Humours. This system was destined to dominate the whole trend of physiology and psychology almost until the present day; for what the “heterodox” schools of antiquity had opposed to humoral pathology was either forgotten or else merged into the orthodox doctrine by the second-century eclectics, especially Galen. In the same way Paracelsus’s objections went long unheard. This system can be accounted for only by the combination of three very ancient (and, in part at least, specifically Greek) principles: 1. The search for simple primary elements or qualities, to which the complex and apparently irrational structure of both macrocosm and microcosm could be directly traced. 2. The urge to find a numerical expression for this complex structure of bodily and spiritual existence. 3. The theory of harmony, symmetry, isonomy, or whatever other name men may have chosen to express that perfect proportion in parts, in materials, or in faculties, which Greek thought down to Plotinus always regarded as essential to any value, moral, aesthetic or hygienic. In seeking, then, to ascertain the origin of humoralism, we must go back to the Pythagoreans, not only because the veneration of number in general attained its highest expression in Pythagorean philosophy, but more particularly because the Pythagoreans regarded the number four as specially significant. They used to swear by four, “which holds the root and source of eternal nature”; and not only nature in general, but rational man in particular, seemed to them governed by four principles, located in the brain, the heart, the navel and the phallus respectively. Even the soul was later on envisaged as fourfold, enclosing intellect, understanding, opinion and perception. The Pythagoreans themselves did not evolve a doctrine of four humours, but they prepared the ground by postulating a series of tetradic categories (such as, for instance, those already mentioned; earth, air, fire and water; spring, summer, autumn and winter). In this system, once it was evolved, the four humours could easily be accommodated. Above all, they defined health as the equilibrium of different qualities, and sickness as the predominance of one—a concept truly decisive for humoralism proper. Alcmaeon of Croton, a Pythagorean doctor who lived about 500 B. C., declared that “equality of rights between the qualities moist, dry, cold, hot, bitter, sweet, and the rest, preserved health, but the rule of one among them produces sickness”; and he condensed the notion of health into the formula “a well-balanced mixture of the qualities”. Whereas Alcmaeon left indefinite the number and nature of the qualities whose isonomy constituted health (“moist, dry, cold, hot, bitter, sweet, and the rest”), Philolaus took a step forward towards humoralisrn by describing the number four as “the principle of health”. The emergence of a thoroughgoing doctrine of humoralism required, however, the fulfilment of three further conditions. First, the Pythagoreans had venerated four as being a perfect number. It was now also given a physical content; this was achieved when the Pythagorean number symbolism was transformed into a doctrine of the cosmic elements. Secondly, each of these four elements had to be interpreted in terms of a quality which established, as it were, an apparent link between the original elements and the corresponding components of the human body which could not, in their empirical actuality, be regarded as pure earth, pure water, and so on. Thirdly, certain real substances which appeared to correspond to those elements and qualities had to be found in the human body, for only then could the speculations of natural philosophy be reconciled with the empirical evidence of medicine and physiology.Melancholia imitatur

OpenType Features

On Capitals to Small Capitals

C2SC

ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ

On Contextual Alternates

CALT

Qp fî

On Case-Sensitive Forms

CASE

H¡¿·•//\/-–—(){}[]«»‹›@|¦¬

On Capital Spacing

CPSP

ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ

On Discretionary Ligatures

DLIG

Th tf ttf tt

On Denominators

DNOM

H0123456789

On Diagonal Fractions

FRAC

1/2 1/3 2/3 1/4 3/4 1/8 3/8 5/8 7/8

On Standard Ligatures

LIGA

fb ffb ff fh ffh fi ffi fj ffj fk ffk fl ffl fft ftt ft

On Lining Figures

LNUM

0123456789

On Numerators

NUMR

H0123456789

On Ordinals

ORDN

1abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz no nos No Nos No nos

On Lowercase to Small Capitals

SMCP

abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz

On Arrows

SS01

--W --E --S --N --NW --NE --SE --SW --NS --WE

On Ornemental ligatures

SS02

ct sp st

On Subscript

SUBS

Habcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz H0123456789 H−+=()-.,

On Superscript

SUPS

Habcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz H0123456789 H−+=()-.,

On Tabular Numbers

TNUM

0123456789

On Slashed Zero

ZERO

102 304 506 809

Character Map

Style

Cap Height700

X Height490

Baseline0

Ascender950

Descender-250

Basic Latin

(

)

;

[

]

{

}

Latin-1 Supplement

Latin Extended-A

Latin Extended-B

IPA Extensions

Spacing Modifier Letters

Combining Diacritical Marks

Greek and Coptic

Latin Extended Additional

Ḡ

ḡ

Ẁ

ẁ

Ẃ

ẃ

Ẅ

ẅ

ẞ

Ẽ

ẽ

Ỳ

ỳ

Ỹ

ỹ

General Punctuation

–

—

‘

’

‚

“

”

„

†

‡

•

…

‰

‹

›

⁄

Superscripts and Subscripts

⁰

⁴

⁵

⁶

⁷

⁸

⁹

Currency Symbols

€

Letterlike Symbols

№

℗

™

℮

Number Forms

⅓

⅔

⅛

⅜

⅝

⅞

Arrows

←

↑

→

↓

↔

↕

↖

↗

↘

↙

Mathematical Operators

∂

∅

∆

∏

∑

−

√

∞

∫

≈

≠

≤

≥

Geometric Shapes

■

▲

▶

▼

◀

◆

◊

●

Dingbats

❤

Alphabetic Presentation Forms

ﬁ

ﬂ

Supported Languages

▼

Abenaki
Afaan Oromo
Afar
Afrikaans
Albanian
Alsatian
Amis
Anuta
Aragonese
Aranese
Aromanian
Arrernte
Arvanitic
Asturian
Atayal
Aymara
Azerbaijani
Bashkir
Basque
Belarusian
Bemba
Bikol
Bislama
Bosnian
Breton
Bulgarian
Romanization
Cape Verdean
Catalan
Cebuano
Chamorro
Chavacano
Chichewa
Chickasaw
Chinese Pinyin
Cimbrian
Cofan
Corsican
Creek
Crimean Tatar
Croatian
Czech
Danish
Dawan
Delaware
Dholuo
Drehu
Dutch
English
Esperanto
Estonian
Faroese
Fijian
Filipino
Finnish
Folkspraak
French
Frisian
Friulian
Gagauz
Galician
Ganda
Genoese
German
Gikuyu
Gooniyandi
Greenlandic
Greenlandic Old
Orthography
Guadeloupean
Gwichin
Haitian Creole
Han
Hawaiian
Hiligaynon
Hopi
Hotcak
Hungarian
Icelandic
Ido
Ilocano
Indonesian
Interglossa
Interlingua
Irish
Istroromanian
Italian
Jamaican
Javanese
Jerriais
Kaingang
Kala Lagaw Ya
Kapampangan
Kaqchikel
Karakalpak
Karelian
Kashubian
Kikongo
Kinyarwanda
Kiribati
Kirundi
Kurdish
Ladin
Latin
Latino Sine
Latvian
Lithuanian
Lojban
Lombard
Low Saxon
Luxembourgish
Maasai
Makhuwa
Malay
Maltese
Manx
Maori
Marquesan
Meglenoromanian
Meriam Mir
Mirandese
Mohawk
Moldovan
Montagnais
Montenegrin
Murrinhpatha
Nagamese Creole
Ndebele
Neapolitan
Ngiyambaa
Niuean
Noongar
Norwegian
Novial
Occidental
Occitan
Old Icelandic
Old Norse
Oshiwambo
Ossetian
Palauan
Papiamento
Piedmontese
Polish
Portuguese
Potawatomi
Qeqchi
Quechua
Rarotongan
Romanian
Romansh
Rotokas
Sami Inari
Sami Lule
Sami Northern
Sami Southern
Samoan
Sango
Saramaccan
Sardinian
Scottish Gaelic
Serbian
Seri
Seychellois
Shawnee
Shona
Sicilian
Silesian
Slovak
Slovenian
Slovio
Somali
Sorbian Lower
Sorbian Upper
Sotho Northern
Sotho Southern
Spanish
Sranan
Sundanese
Swahili
Swazi
Swedish
Tagalog
Tahitian
Tetum
Tok Pisin
Tokelauan
Tongan
Tshiluba
Tsonga
Tswana
Tumbuka
Turkish
Turkmen
Tuvaluan
Tzotzil
Ukrainian
Uzbek
Venetian
Vepsian
Volapuk
Voro
Wallisian
Walloon
Waraywaray
Warlpiri
Wayuu
Welsh
Wikmungkan
Wiradjuri
Wolof
Xavante
Xhosa
Yapese
Yindjibarndi
Zapotec
Zulu Zuni

TypefaceImmortel

DesignerClément Le Tulle-Neyret

Release 2021

Fonts In Use

Article

Specimen

16 Styles

Infra

Colera

Vena

Acedia

6 Variables

Infra

Vena

OpenType Features

Character Map

Supported Languages

Immortel in Use