ADVANCED-RESEARCH-L Archives

Archiver > ADVANCED-RESEARCH > 2007-08 > 1187038895


From: "Kith-n-Kin" <>
Subject: Re: [ADVANRES] question re signing of deed
Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2007 14:01:35 -0700
References: <f55f8a5a0708130803h7cbab7b8q2a6215dcd154ee4b@mail.gmail.com> <003501c7ddd9$367d1fc0$6401a8c0@Ralphs><008001c7dde6$8e813f00$6500a8c0@myraxlh0suhi2o>
In-Reply-To: <008001c7dde6$8e813f00$6500a8c0@myraxlh0suhi2o>


We have cases where the "mark" was actually the initial of the person. One
case was a "James ^mark^ Palmer" where the "mark" was the letter "J" but
later transcribers read the "J" as an "I", ignored the fact that it was in a
different handwriting than the rest of the document, and turned him in to
James I. Palmer. Hmmmm. I am always suspicious of (a) middle initials in
early documents, and (b) middle initials that could be from the first or
last name. Interesting article in Ancestry.com says
(http://www.ancestry.com/learn/library/article.aspx?article=8438 ):

" Not all individuals who signed with a mark used an x or +. It is
interesting to observe the variety of ways in which persons attempted to
make their marks both personal and unique. Some people managed only a simple
squiggle or circle, but many used an initial letter of their first or last
name, indicating that they had probably learned their alphabet as children.

Many clerks followed the practice of carefully recording individual marks.
Unfortunately, this thoughtful practice was not universal. Some county
clerks simply wrote "his mark" or "her x mark," even though the mark may not
have been an x. Some published abstracts do not include descriptions of the
marks.

If your ancestor signed with a mark, you will want to obtain copies of every
document. The differences between how two individuals wrote a simple letter
of the alphabet can be significant.

When William Smith made his will in Cecil County, Maryland, in 1709, he
signed with his W mark-as did the William Smith who witnessed it. The
differences between the two are so distinctive that if we found another
document recorded by an equally meticulous clerk, we probably would be able
to assign the document with some surety to the correct man. They also
indicate the value of keeping photocopies or scanned images of every
ancestral signature or mark, whether original or facsimile."

And I agree about the ill and infirm. A few years ago I was called on to
witness the "signature" of an elderly woman who had at least two degrees
(that I knew of). She made a very wobbly "X" as that was all she could
manage. For that reason there had to be both a notary and another (unbiased)
witness.

Pat (in Tucson)

-----Original Message-----
From:
[mailto:] On Behalf Of Myra Vanderpool
Gormley
Sent: Monday, August 13, 2007 1:15 PM
To: ;
Subject: Re: [ADVANRES] question re signing of deed

Another thing to keep in mind about the signing of deeds/wills is that we
should not assume they were illiterate just because they "made their mark."
They might have been old, sick, crippled with arthritis, or they might have
been German [as an example] and didn't understand the difference between a
"signature" and "making their mark" and just did as they were told.

This thread: