RootsChat.Com
Old Photographs, Recognition, Handwriting Deciphering => Handwriting Deciphering & Recognition => Topic started by: Deskman on Friday 09 February 18 20:54 GMT (UK)
-
Any help with the xxxs and related text here is much appreciated.
"well I suppose famers are quite as big people
as tradesfolk & I shouldn’t like my women kind to mix
with servants even tho they be chief butlers - still my
people are very different to even the exclusive Carrie Bromley
& it seems queer that they (Davis + co & farmers) shouldn’t mix. Tho amusing how"
All the bold text is through help here. Fine folks here are brightening my transcription from dark uncertainty to wonder. Thank you.
-
Can't see the bottom line but could the xxxxxxx be exclusive or exclude
-
Thanks for those Millipede, I'm now favouring exclusion but failing to find the meaning.
Deskman
-
... very different to even the exclusive Carrie ...
... queer that they ^(xxx xxx & the farmers)^ shouldn’t mix.
-
On the first line, your xx looks like "by", but because he always shortens "ing" to "g", it could also be something like "trying". The Q in quite is extremely different than in queer, so I'm not overly committed to thinking it is quite.
I'm wondering of the bracketed words should follow the word difficult, as in:
people are very different (I am & co & the farmers) to(?) even the exclusive Carrie Bromly.
-
1st line could be ... big people, in the sense of social status, comparing tradespeople with farmers.
-
Thank you bbbat and Bookbox and thanks again Milliepede,
Great work
I get exclusive now.
The trying / big options are interesting
There is a big here http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=786937.0 (http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=786937.0) in the last line of the image in the first post and one attached.
Two trying are also attached.
I think that the (I am xxx & the farmers) text is in the right place as I see a clear insert symbol subscript between they and shouldnt
I will address quite in another posting.
Deskman
-
Hmmm... ??? ;D
The bit in brackets is bugging me.
I've zoomed in on it and I don't think it's "I am"...the "I" doesn't look right for him.
To me, it looks like queer that they (Nans/Hans/Vans<?> + co & the farmers) shouldn't mix.
I'm with Bookbox on to even the exclusive... The closing bracket of the inserted phrase misleadingly makes "the" look like "they".
Karen
-
I've zoomed in on it and I don't think it's "I am"...the "I" doesn't look right for him.
To me, it looks like queer that they (Nans/Hans/Vans<?> + co & the farmers) shouldn't mix.
I agree. The inserted parenthesis explains the identity of they -- i.e. somebody and the farmers.
Could it be ... (?airs & co & the farmers) ? Is there a person's name higher up that is being referenced here?
-
Stunning work.
With all this help I can now read
"well I suppose famers are quite as xx people
as tradesfolk & I shouldn’t like my women kind to mix
with servants even tho they be chief butlers - still my
people are very different to even the exclusive Carrie Bromley
& it seems queer that they (Davies + co & the farmers) shouldn’t mix. Tho amusing how"
Davies is most appropriate in the context.
Apologies for not acknowledging earlier my error for confusing a closing parenthesis with a y's descender in the(y). That was so clumsy.
Below are two quites from the same paragraph. Without any other suggestion I am content with quite here.
Thanks again bbart, Bookbox, Karen Mcdonald & Milliepede.
Deskman
-
As always, Davis is so obvious, now that you've found it. ;)
-
Just to illustrate just the size of (Davies + co & the farmers)
That's millimetres!
-
.... and I have gone for big. Makes perfect sense.
-
Just to illustrate just the size of (Davies + co & the farmers)
That's millimetres!
Just as well we can enlarge onscreen!
-
I think that the (I am xxx & the farmers) text is in the right place as I see a clear insert symbol subscript between they and shouldnt
I saw that insert symbol, and thought it was the top of letter in the row below. Oops!
Well done, everyone!
-
Apologies for not acknowledging earlier my error for confusing a closing parenthesis with a y's descender in the(y). That was so clumsy.
Please stop apologising!
You have made fantastic progress with the diary and I am sure that everyone here will agree when I say that we have all enjoyed (are all enjoying) being able to take part in the project!
Best regards,
Karen