Ben writes:
"That consistency cannot possibly be construed as an "indicator" that he wrote differently in 1888."
No, it canīt, Ben! You are absolutely correct. We have NO indications to how he wrote other than in 1898 and 1911.
What I meant was that if we were to have Toppy conforming to the general rule that people change their signatures, then he may have done so inbetween 1888 and 1898. It would not be a strange thing at all.
"I'm not convinced that Toppy's work was likely to have an enfeebling effect on his hand, personally, especially as he grew older and was presumably in a better position to delegate while he did the ordering and measuring."
That represents a possibility, Ben, and I will once again say that we cannot know about this - but we DO know that labour that is hard on the joints of your limbs takes itīs toll sooner or later.
The best,
Fisherman
"That consistency cannot possibly be construed as an "indicator" that he wrote differently in 1888."
No, it canīt, Ben! You are absolutely correct. We have NO indications to how he wrote other than in 1898 and 1911.
What I meant was that if we were to have Toppy conforming to the general rule that people change their signatures, then he may have done so inbetween 1888 and 1898. It would not be a strange thing at all.
"I'm not convinced that Toppy's work was likely to have an enfeebling effect on his hand, personally, especially as he grew older and was presumably in a better position to delegate while he did the ordering and measuring."
That represents a possibility, Ben, and I will once again say that we cannot know about this - but we DO know that labour that is hard on the joints of your limbs takes itīs toll sooner or later.
The best,
Fisherman
Comment