RootsChat.Com

Old Photographs, Recognition, Handwriting Deciphering => Handwriting Deciphering & Recognition => Topic started by: musictrish on Sunday 05 November 23 10:09 GMT (UK)

Title: CAN ANYONE PLEASE READ OR ENHANCE……?
Post by: musictrish on Sunday 05 November 23 10:09 GMT (UK)
Can anyone please manage to read or enhance this signature.
The marriage is recorded as of a George Porter and Mary Ann Wicks. George signed with a cross but Mary Ann signed her  name but added another name to the register. As I have been searching for the past 14 years to find the marriage of her parents and her mothers maiden name. This could be the biggest clue yet if she took on her mothers maiden name and added it to her Christian name when signing.
Also underneath the name where the stain is appears to be further writing. I have tried to enhance it but am still unable to make out the name.
Thank you
Trish
Title: Re: CAN ANYONE PLEASE READ OR ENHANCE……?
Post by: rutht22000 on Sunday 05 November 23 10:18 GMT (UK)
Hi

Could it be 'Parry'?
Title: Re: CAN ANYONE PLEASE READ OR ENHANCE……?
Post by: ShaunJ on Sunday 05 November 23 10:46 GMT (UK)
Linking to the original image: https://www.ancestry.co.uk/imageviewer/collections/61058/images/PAR124_1_R3_1_006
Title: Re: CAN ANYONE PLEASE READ OR ENHANCE……?
Post by: Bookbox on Sunday 05 November 23 12:09 GMT (UK)
Looking at the original image, as posted by ShaunJ, I think Mary Ann first attempted to sign with her new married name, Porter, when she should have signed Wicks (which she then added). This was a mistake occasionally made by brides. In this case there appears to be a smudge around the name, which may be an attempt to erase it.
Title: Re: CAN ANYONE PLEASE READ OR ENHANCE……?
Post by: carol8353 on Sunday 05 November 23 12:29 GMT (UK)
Looking at the original image, as posted by ShaunJ, I think Mary Ann first attempted to sign with her new married name, Porter, when she should have signed Wicks (which she then added). This was a mistake occasionally made by brides. In this case there appears to be a smudge around the name, which may be an attempt to erase it.

My thoughts exactly............cos I did it myself in 1973 !!!