TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM-L Archives

Archiver > TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM > 2008-10 > 1225494075


From: Patti Hobbs <>
Subject: Re: [TGF] Signature Comparison
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2008 18:01:15 -0500
References: <mailman.1079.1225350144.19841.transitional-genealogists-forum@rootsweb.com><017201c93aa5$5e2d4610$1a87d230$@com>
In-Reply-To: <017201c93aa5$5e2d4610$1a87d230$@com>


Kerry,

That's an interesting thought, and I'll have to keep something like
that in mind if it become applicable to some future circumstances; but
in this case, no, she wouldn't have been a newlywed in 1822. If she
is the person in the pension file, she was married about 1790ish.

Patti


On Oct 30, 2008, at 10:37 AM, Kerry Sandberg Scott wrote:

> One thing I noticed is that there are greater differences between
> the two
> documents in the last name than in the first name, and others have
> made that
> observation as well. Could she have been fairly newly married when
> the
> first document was signed?
>
> When I married and changed my last name from "Sandberg" to "Sandberg
> Scott,"
> my signature looked a bit odd for the first few months, because I
> was not
> used to writing "Scott" (I never, ever write in cursive unless I'm
> signing
> my name). Even the "S" looked different in "Scott" than in
> "Sandberg."
>
> Now that I've been married for quite a while, the "Sandberg" and
> "Scott" are
> equally illegible.
>
> -Kerry Sandberg Scott
> Milwaukee, WI
>
>
>
>
> -------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
> with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and
> the body of the message


This thread: