Are these the same people?

[Richard Knott]

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

[rosie99]

It is easier for us if you post the copies next to each other on this thread like you did on your other one 

[goldie61]

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? 

[Richard Knott]

Thanks; don't know what happened there.
Signatures now attached.
R

[Gadget]

I would say that the 1735 is in a different hand.

[3sillydogs]

I would agree, the 1735 looks as if it was signed by a different person

[rosie99]

I also agree that the 1735 is a different person

[alpinecottage]

I too think 1735 signature is different -every letter in John differs, as do the capital S and t in the surname.

[Anne Lothian]

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