RootsChat.Com
Old Photographs, Recognition, Handwriting Deciphering => Handwriting Deciphering & Recognition => Topic started by: Richard Knott on Sunday 30 April 17 08:15 BST (UK)
-
The 1763 and 1778 signatures are known to be the same person. Could the 1735 one be the same person as well, decades earlier? There are differences in the first 't' but similarities elsewhere.
I did ask this question at the end of a post a couple of years ago, but no-one replied as I think the question was confused by the rest of the post:
http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=720835.msg5651420#msg5651420
Richard
-
It is easier for us if you post the copies next to each other on this thread like you did on your other one ;)
-
Just to say the 3 attachments on this post are empty! At least that's what my computer says when you try to download them! ;) And if you look at the attachments, they say 0kb.
I looked at your previous post. Only two on there - from 1763 and 1778 - as you say, the same signature.
No 1735 one.
Have another go? :)
-
Thanks; don't know what happened there.
Signatures now attached.
R
-
I would say that the 1735 is in a different hand.
-
I would agree, the 1735 looks as if it was signed by a different person
-
I also agree that the 1735 is a different person
-
I too think 1735 signature is different -every letter in John differs, as do the capital S and t in the surname.
-
Just took me a minute to work out that the numbers attached to these photos are years and not photo numbers!
Looking at the 1735 signature I immediately thought that it had been written by someone who was in the early stages of learning to write! I've seen this on birth certificate, although in the 1800s not 1700s, where the father makes a fairly poor attempt to sign the birth certificate of his child, but by the time he's signing the certificates of later children his signature has developed and matured significantly. You can see similarities between the early and later signatures.
Now that I'm writing this I don't know how to get back to look at the images, but I did think there was a similarity between the earliest signature and one of the others in the slope and form of the top part of the J, and even the o h and n. All of the surname looks as if it's been more than the writer was able to cope with!
So is it the same signature? Not sure, but not a definite 'no'...... in my opinion!
Anne
-
It's the 1735 and 1778 signature that I can see these similarities between. Remember, there are 43 years between these. A
-
Thanks for your replies. I accept that there are real differences which may mean that they are different people but, the letter 't' apart, the differences are more to do with joining letters up rather than the shape of the letters I think.
If they are different it's a pity because the 1735 John ticks some boxes. I was keen to get views on the signatures without being influenced by other things, but:
'My' John (the later signatures) had a child with a Mary in 1741 and had previously had a son called Thomas who was apprenticed as a surgeon in 1746 (so bc 1732) - I assume it is his mother Mary's signature on his 1763 marriage entry. I haven't been able to find another Thomas whose parents were called John and Mary, apart from the staymaker who had children in 1732 (Thomas) and 1734 (d young).
In his will, my John left everything to his second wife and to his grandson, and not to any children. The fact that Thomas and his two sisters (ie the 1732,1734 and 1741 baptisms) had predeceased their father gave a reason for their father's will.
My John was fairly wealthy and called a 'gentleman' in his will, with no mention of being a staymaker.
Richard