<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The six signatures</title>
	<atom:link href="http://politicworm.com/oxford-shakespeare/to-be-or-not-to-be-shakespeare/why-not-william/the-authorship-question-2/how-he-spelled-his-name/six-signatures/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://politicworm.com</link>
	<description>Shakespeare authorship</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 25 May 2012 15:40:12 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sonny Chiba</title>
		<link>http://politicworm.com/oxford-shakespeare/to-be-or-not-to-be-shakespeare/why-not-william/the-authorship-question-2/how-he-spelled-his-name/six-signatures/#comment-9158</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Sonny Chiba]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Feb 2012 14:06:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://politicworm.com/?page_id=757#comment-9158</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[cool story bro, changed my life.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>cool story bro, changed my life.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: hopkinshughes</title>
		<link>http://politicworm.com/oxford-shakespeare/to-be-or-not-to-be-shakespeare/why-not-william/the-authorship-question-2/how-he-spelled-his-name/six-signatures/#comment-1049</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[hopkinshughes]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Jun 2010 13:38:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://politicworm.com/?page_id=757#comment-1049</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Because all six signatures occur on legal documents, there&#039;s no argument that all (the surnames that is) were written by William himself since a person&#039;s signature (or mark, if illiterate) was required to make documents legally binding.  No one has ever questioned whether or not he wrote these versions of his surname himself.  Certainly no lettered person would have made such a bad job of it.

As for the nature of his signatures, yes, idiosyncratic scrawls were used then as now, but where these are obviously signatures, William&#039;s suggest the kind of labored effort shown by the signature of a six-year-old, a drawn image, taught by his parents, that as yet has no meaning for him in terms of a sequence of known letters.  Although this copy can&#039;t reproduce the shades of ink that give greater clarity to the signatures, there&#039;s no doubt that the man who wrote these versions of &lt;em&gt;Shakspeare&lt;/em&gt; did not know how to write anything but his last name, and that not well.  He seems to have remembered it up to the &lt;strong&gt;k&lt;/strong&gt;, at which point his memory would fail him.  In (e) and possibly (d) it seems he actually attempted the &lt;em&gt;William&lt;/em&gt;.  Orthodox scholars tend to agree that the other &lt;em&gt;Williams&lt;/em&gt; were written by the scribe who penned the rest of the document.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Because all six signatures occur on legal documents, there&#8217;s no argument that all (the surnames that is) were written by William himself since a person&#8217;s signature (or mark, if illiterate) was required to make documents legally binding.  No one has ever questioned whether or not he wrote these versions of his surname himself.  Certainly no lettered person would have made such a bad job of it.</p>
<p>As for the nature of his signatures, yes, idiosyncratic scrawls were used then as now, but where these are obviously signatures, William&#8217;s suggest the kind of labored effort shown by the signature of a six-year-old, a drawn image, taught by his parents, that as yet has no meaning for him in terms of a sequence of known letters.  Although this copy can&#8217;t reproduce the shades of ink that give greater clarity to the signatures, there&#8217;s no doubt that the man who wrote these versions of <em>Shakspeare</em> did not know how to write anything but his last name, and that not well.  He seems to have remembered it up to the <strong>k</strong>, at which point his memory would fail him.  In (e) and possibly (d) it seems he actually attempted the <em>William</em>.  Orthodox scholars tend to agree that the other <em>Williams</em> were written by the scribe who penned the rest of the document.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kalev Pank</title>
		<link>http://politicworm.com/oxford-shakespeare/to-be-or-not-to-be-shakespeare/why-not-william/the-authorship-question-2/how-he-spelled-his-name/six-signatures/#comment-1047</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Kalev Pank]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Jun 2010 12:32:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://politicworm.com/?page_id=757#comment-1047</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Were signatures in Shakespeare&#039;s time written as we do today, often just a unique scrawl originally based on the name?  They do not have to represent every letter of a name.  And usually they change over time and on occasion are written differently, but with the same general characteristics.
Shakespeares examples above seem to follow this model.  Writing instruments of the time would also have had a marked effect on the quality of the signature.  To me they seem to be by the same man.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Were signatures in Shakespeare&#8217;s time written as we do today, often just a unique scrawl originally based on the name?  They do not have to represent every letter of a name.  And usually they change over time and on occasion are written differently, but with the same general characteristics.<br />
Shakespeares examples above seem to follow this model.  Writing instruments of the time would also have had a marked effect on the quality of the signature.  To me they seem to be by the same man.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

