Page 3 of 6
Re: Quint. do Noval 1919: a question of handwriting
Posted: 21:53 Thu 12 Feb 2015
by djewesbury
Glenn E. wrote:djewesbury wrote:They were already planning for the Millennium Bug. Those Victorians eh?
I just calls 'em likes I sees 'em.
Cemetery & Parks Committee?
Re: Quint. do Noval 1919: a question of handwriting
Posted: 23:35 Thu 12 Feb 2015
by Glenn E.
djewesbury wrote:Glenn E. wrote:djewesbury wrote:They were already planning for the Millennium Bug. Those Victorians eh?
I just calls 'em likes I sees 'em.
Cemetery & Parks Committee?
Could be, yes. Perhaps also organizational meeting?
Quint. do Noval 1919: a question of handwriting
Posted: 23:47 Wed 11 Mar 2015
by djewesbury
This time the handwriting is mine. The third word. I have no idea. Dark, treacly.. Conterish?? Clear rim, some reddishness.
It was a G10YO.
Re: Quint. do Noval 1919: a question of handwriting
Posted: 23:51 Wed 11 Mar 2015
by jdaw1
That’s not a TN sheet from
my software. Heresy!
Re: Quint. do Noval 1919: a question of handwriting
Posted: 23:52 Wed 11 Mar 2015
by djewesbury
It's one produced by Graham's / Fell's. In fact rather old. I was just refreshing my memory as I wrote a talk for my introductory tasting tomorrow.
Re: Quint. do Noval 1919: a question of handwriting
Posted: 06:51 Thu 12 Mar 2015
by Alex Bridgeman
Dark, treacly, coutrérish. A rim. Poivre radish.
Have I helped?
Re: Quint. do Noval 1919: a question of handwriting
Posted: 08:26 Thu 12 Mar 2015
by djewesbury
No.
Re: Quint. do Noval 1919: a question of handwriting
Posted: 11:19 Thu 12 Mar 2015
by JWEW
Colheiterish
Only guessing based on the context of tasting a wood aged port
Re: Quint. do Noval 1919: a question of handwriting
Posted: 11:39 Thu 12 Mar 2015
by PhilW
Couterish; Clearly you felt it was dark, treacly, and useful for defending your elbows when being attacked by sword or pike.
Re: Quint. do Noval 1919: a question of handwriting
Posted: 21:19 Thu 12 Mar 2015
by djewesbury
None of the above. But thanks to JWEW who was the only person making a serious suggestion!
Re: Quint. do Noval 1919: a question of handwriting
Posted: 21:35 Tue 09 Jun 2015
by jdaw1
Please help with another Christie’s annotation, this one from the auction on 4
th July 1974.
Re: Quint. do Noval 1919: a question of handwriting
Posted: 21:38 Tue 09 Jun 2015
by DRT
Very rare parcel?
Re: Quint. do Noval 1919: a question of handwriting
Posted: 21:41 Tue 09 Jun 2015
by PhilW
DRT wrote:Very rare parcel?
+1. Not completely sure about parcel, but seems likely and viable.
Re: Quint. do Noval 1919: a question of handwriting
Posted: 21:59 Tue 09 Jun 2015
by jdaw1
PhilW wrote:DRT wrote:Very rare parcel?
+1.
Parcel! Thank you.
Re: Quint. do Noval 1919: a question of handwriting
Posted: 22:08 Fri 12 Jun 2015
by jdaw1
Please kind sirs, what was the price of the last of these lots? £24? £29?
Re: Quint. do Noval 1919: a question of handwriting
Posted: 22:16 Fri 12 Jun 2015
by Andy Velebil
I would say 29 as the bottom line doesn't extend to the right past the vertical part as the other examples do. But the "2" is very different in the bottom example than the top ones. So I would assume these were written in by different people. As such it could be a 24. Though it appears the top was meant to touch but the ink is very light and the vertical part is very long, something not usually done when writing 4.
So I would still stick with it being a "29"
Re: Quint. do Noval 1919: a question of handwriting
Posted: 22:36 Fri 12 Jun 2015
by PhilW
Very ambiguous. I read it naturally as 24, but agree that on analysis 29 is more likely; it does appear to be a different had to the preceding examples, are there any following examples in the same hand to compare?
Re: Quint. do Noval 1919: a question of handwriting
Posted: 04:46 Mon 15 Jun 2015
by Glenn E.
Andy Velebil wrote:I would say 29 as the bottom line doesn't extend to the right past the vertical part as the other examples do. But the "2" is very different in the bottom example than the top ones. So I would assume these were written in by different people. As such it could be a 24. Though it appears the top was meant to touch but the ink is very light and the vertical part is very long, something not usually done when writing 4.
So I would still stick with it being a "29"
Agreed.
Also, the vertical stroke is at an angle which is more common in a 9 than in a 4.
Re: Handwriting questions
Posted: 15:52 Mon 20 Jul 2015
by jdaw1
In the following list of shipper names, the fifth begins “Mart”.
Do you agree that the word is written “ Martniez’ ”?
Re: Handwriting questions
Posted: 16:00 Mon 20 Jul 2015
by Glenn E.
jdaw1 wrote:In the following list of shipper names, the fifth begins “Mart”.
Do you agree that the word is written “ Martniez’ ”?
I can see either " Martniez' " or " Martuiez' ".
Re: Handwriting questions
Posted: 16:07 Mon 20 Jul 2015
by flash_uk
I would say it is Martinez with a clumsy effort for an 'n', and the dot over the 'i' very poorly positioned.
Re: Handwriting questions
Posted: 16:43 Mon 20 Jul 2015
by DaveRL
I agree: Martinez with the dot poorly positioned.
Re: Handwriting questions
Posted: 20:25 Mon 20 Jul 2015
by PhilW
Could be Martinez or Martniez, no other examples of "i" usage for dot offset distance comparison; I would assume Martinez.
Re: Handwriting questions
Posted: 16:10 Tue 04 Aug 2015
by uncle tom
Do you agree that the word is written “ Martniez’ ”?
Lysdexia, I suspect..
Re: Handwriting questions
Posted: 19:39 Tue 04 Aug 2015
by Andy Velebil
uncle tom wrote:Do you agree that the word is written “ Martniez’ ”?
Lysdexia, I suspect..
I was thinking maybe Portdexia??
Re: Handwriting questions
Posted: 14:25 Mon 17 Aug 2015
by jdaw1
On what date did the wine merchant deliver this Port?
Is it “4 Jan 1911” (which was a Wednesday)?
Re: Handwriting questions
Posted: 14:37 Mon 17 Aug 2015
by djewesbury
Are there any immediately preceding or subsequent dates in the ledger?
Handwriting questions
Posted: 14:37 Mon 17 Aug 2015
by djewesbury
And is this definitely a date?
Is it possible to include more of the surrounding text as context?
Re: Handwriting questions
Posted: 15:57 Mon 17 Aug 2015
by jdaw1
Reload previous image. And
Yes, definitely a date.
Re: Handwriting questions
Posted: 16:13 Mon 17 Aug 2015
by PhilW
Agree on "4 Jan 1911"
Re: Handwriting questions
Posted: 16:16 Mon 17 Aug 2015
by djewesbury
Yes. Seeing his looped Js and the rounded nature of his other characters confirms this.
Re: Handwriting questions
Posted: 16:22 Mon 17 Aug 2015
by jdaw1
Thank you team.
Re: Handwriting questions
Posted: 16:31 Mon 17 Aug 2015
by flash_uk
And Jan makes sense given the chronological sequencing - it immediately follows 1914, and is then followed by date entries which look like March and April.
Re: Handwriting questions
Posted: 16:42 Mon 17 Aug 2015
by djewesbury
flash_uk wrote:And Jan makes sense given the chronological sequencing - it immediately follows 1914, and is then followed by date entries which look like March and April.
You're looking at the wrong image.
Re: Handwriting questions
Posted: 15:49 Thu 27 Aug 2015
by jdaw1
Who is the second partner in the wine merchant selling the Martinez 1904?
Not scaled, brightened, added contrast:
Could it be (a surprisingly French) “frère”? Or “friere”, with lower-case ‘f’?
Re: Handwriting questions
Posted: 17:54 Thu 27 Aug 2015
by djewesbury
& Grieve.
Re: Handwriting questions
Posted: 17:54 Thu 27 Aug 2015
by Alex Bridgeman
Look at the similarity of the start of the unknown word to the two occurrences of "the" earlier in the photo. I would see the unknown word as being something such as THRIEVE
Handwriting questions
Posted: 17:56 Thu 27 Aug 2015
by djewesbury
Handwriting questions
Posted: 17:58 Thu 27 Aug 2015
by djewesbury
Thrieve? Are you smoking crack? That's an 'and' sign (reduced ampersand) and a G.
Re: Handwriting questions
Posted: 18:01 Thu 27 Aug 2015
by jdaw1
djewesbury wrote:& Grieve.
Interesting.
And this picture came from Trinity College.
Edit: your researching the name was faster.
Re: Handwriting questions
Posted: 20:16 Thu 27 Aug 2015
by Alex Bridgeman
djewesbury wrote:Thrieve? Are you smoking crack? That's an 'and' sign (reduced ampersand) and a G.
No. Skunk. Goes better with Dow '91.
Re: Handwriting questions
Posted: 20:39 Thu 27 Aug 2015
by DRT
AHB wrote:djewesbury wrote:Thrieve? Are you smoking crack? That's an 'and' sign (reduced ampersand) and a G.
No. Skunk. Goes better with Dow '91.
I completely agree.
Re: Handwriting questions
Posted: 21:06 Thu 27 Aug 2015
by djewesbury
I should point out that it was my keen, orthographic detective's eye which revealed the answer. Google followed after, as corroboration.
Re: Handwriting questions
Posted: 22:27 Thu 27 Aug 2015
by DRT
djewesbury wrote:I should point out that it was my keen, orthographic detective's eye which revealed the answer. Google followed after, as corroboration.
I knew that. You are clearly feeling insecure in needing to point it out. Man up.
Re: Handwriting questions
Posted: 22:39 Thu 27 Aug 2015
by djewesbury
I just thought I should advertise my good points. Like the Americans do.
Re: Handwriting questions
Posted: 21:50 Tue 01 Sep 2015
by jdaw1
Small image:
Link to
large image, with original colouration.
“Sealed G. B. Clarke & Co”? “… & Son”? Other?
(Nothing else in this hand: no further clues.)
Re: Handwriting questions
Posted: 22:05 Tue 01 Sep 2015
by DRT
& Co.
Re: Handwriting questions
Posted: 23:47 Fri 11 Sep 2015
by jdaw1
Whence comes this Croft 1834?
(Second picture has added brightness and contrast, and colour completely de-saturated.)
Re: Handwriting questions
Posted: 06:15 Sat 12 Sep 2015
by PhilW
Bin No. 58 Port
1875 April 13 Bought by ?. C. ???? Esq
of ?? ?????? "1834"
Thompson and Crofts at 75/-
cost with expenses 100/-
I can't decipher the buyer's name or seller's name properly, the latter looks something like "Wm. Tilliffe" (shortened Wilhelm?) but I have no confidence in that reading. Does look like purchase of "1834 Thompson & Crofts" though, not just Croft.
Re: Handwriting questions
Posted: 09:21 Sat 12 Sep 2015
by jdaw1
My question asked “whence”. You have answered everything else (though I think the no-expenses cost was 95/-). And Croft was formerly known as Thompson & Croft.
