Could this be the same person?

[smudwhisk]

Just wondering on RCers views on whether the attached two signatures could be the same person.  One is Richard Hyatt's own marriage in 1796 and the other is the witness to a marriage in 1816.  I'd originally thought the 1816 marriage was for my Richard Hyatt's son Henry, but further investigation suggests it was a different Henry born in Wiltshire who emigrated to Tasmania.  My Richard wasn't born in Wiltshire but I don't know where his parents were from so I'm just wondering if Henry could have been a relative.

I appreciate it's not that easy to compare signatures and there is a 20 year gap, but personally I think they are very similar.  The curl above the H on the 1796 signature is from the word Curate on the line above.  The later witness signature has a more flowing R and H, but there are other similarities between the two.

Any helpful suggestions appreciated.  Just looking for comments on the signature as I have sufficient on the Hyatt family.

Nicola

[craggagh]

Hello -

I'd say that there is a good chance that they are the same person.

craggagh.

[Romilly]

But the 'y's are written very differently...

Romilly.

[Gadget]

On balance, I'd say they were.

[smudwhisk]

Thanks to everyone for their comments, much appreciated.

Yes, the y's appear different because the first has no tail, but the top bit isn't that dissimilar.  The d on Richard is unusual, the double t in Hyatt is albut the same and the R isn't that dissimilar.   Mind you it's also worth bearing in my they are 20 years apart and my signature doesn't look the same from day to day.   Personally, I think there are enough similarities to warrant further investigation, if only I could get easier access to wider Wiltshire records.

My Hyatt family definitely didn't originate anywhere near where they ended up so at the moment it's the only possible hint on where the family originated.

Mind you Richard Hyatt's wife is as bad, her maiden name was Hughes.   But her eldest son on the 1851 Census claimed to be born elsewhere and there is a family there that could tie in.

[suey]

If there is no reason to believe that he didn't sign at the time of his own marriage, no reason to think that he didn't sign as a witness for someone else.  20 years between signatures is a long time, I'd say his handwriting just improved a little over time 

[smudwhisk]

If there is no reason to believe that he didn't sign at the time of his own marriage, no reason to think that he didn't sign as a witness for someone else.  20 years between signatures is a long time, I'd say his handwriting just improved a little over time 

 

Until I came across some ancestry trees listing this Henry Hyatt as born in Wiltshire, I'd always thought it was Richard's son Henry who would have been 18 years old at the time of the marriage but I'd never been able to trace him forward after it.  Following on from the trees, I did some digging about in the Tasmania records and it does look unlikely that this Henry is my one but all the evidence suggests this Henry was from Wiltshire, appears in an apprenticeship indenture tax record (because of the profession) and emigrated to Australia.  That obviously threw up the possibility that if it was possibly my Richard witnessing the marriage, and there isn't another one about at the time as far as I can see, then perhaps my Richard's parents were from Wiltshire or nearby and connected to this family.  Can't find a marriage in the Wiltshire Marriage Index on ancestry but the Wiltshire family are close to the Somerset border so could be over there or possibly just missing from the index or mistranscribed (I know of at least one that definitely is mistranscribed on it).

It'll have to go on the backburner again though for now as haven't easy access to the records and so far nothing that I can gain access to has helped.  I thought I'd post it while I thought of it again as had been updating my Hyatt tree today.