Queen Elizabeth I's signature

[mandarintje]

I was wanting to ask you guys, if you don't mind! if you knew something about Queen Elizabeth's signature. It seems to write Elizilbeth ! but I don't know if it's because it's pre-standardised spelling, corset too tight, or different characters to represent the 'a' back then...... I absolutely love the signature and the period, so am very intrigued to know more!

Wonder if anyone can shine light on it from a graphology point of view too! =P

 

http://artfiles.art.com/5/p/LRG/17/1749/A8N3D00Z/facsimile-of-queen-elizabeth-is-signature-on-the-death-warrant-of-robert-devereux-earl-of-essex.jpg

 

(or is it what we call now a majiscule A, but a line faded)

[Beechwood]

I think that your final line suggestion is accurate, here is another signature

 

http://www.tudorhistory.org/elizabeth/signature.gif

[carlc]

I was wanting to ask you guys, if you don't mind! if you knew something about Queen Elizabeth's signature. It seems to write Elizilbeth ! but I don't know if it's because it's pre-standardised spelling, corset too tight, or different characters to represent the 'a' back then...... I absolutely love the signature and the period, so am very intrigued to know more!

Wonder if anyone can shine light on it from a graphology point of view too! =P

 

http://artfiles.art....rl-of-essex.jpg

 

(or is it what we call now a majiscule A, but a line faded)

 

I tracked this down and according to your source it is the signature of Elizabeth on the death warrant of Robert Devereux the 2nd Earl of Essex.

 

Why is that important? Well by this point Elizabeth was 67 - one heck of an age for the time, Essex had been a favourite of Elizabeth's until his rebellion in 1599. Elizabeth always had stormy relations with her favourites but brooked no insubordination (particularly on the scale that Essex tried).

 

So we have a 68 year old women, signing the death warrant of a previous 'favourite' (for Elizabeth her favourites were a quasi-sexual relationship - or maybe even sexual)? Elizabeth was not fond of signing death warrants (possibly squeamishness more likely she hated carrying the final responsibility and expected others to take the guilt for her). So the hand is almost certainly not as strong as it was.

 

Anyway if you look at the facsimile and then others from different periods you can see that the basic structure of the 'a' is there - compare it with this signature. A further clue is the fact that the capital 'e' does not have its mid lateral (or whatever it's called) so all in all it's her usual signature done with a certain lack of attention or unsteadiness.

 

As far as I have noticed Elizabeth was always consistent in spelling her name - even in this era of somewhat fluid spelling even of names (c.f. Shakespeare).

 

Maybe all this is just baloney - but it's my baloney and I put it forward as a theory.

 

Carl

 

Edited to change Elizabeth's age - Essex was executed in February (Elizabeth's birthday was in September).

Edited April 22, 2010 by carlc

[Randal6393]

Pulled out my copy of Elizabeth I: Her Life in Letters by Felix Pryor (University of California Press, 2003) to compare signatures by Her Royal Highness.

 

Elizabeth, from her earliest signatures, wrote the "z" with a series of flourishes and wrote the bowl of the "a" as one stroke, the stem as a second. The second "e" was a two-stroke letter with bowl (similar to a c) and a 45-degree stem, looking much as the Irish "e". Her early signatures were firm, solid, and clearly read.

 

As time progresses, she seems to have gotten lax in writing her signature. Confirmed by her comment that she "wrote a scrating hand" in later life. If you look at the "Elizilbeth" on the Duke of Essex's death warrant, you will see the start and end marks on the "i" and the "l" is short, has serifs top and bottom, and corresponds to the second stroke of the "a" that she habitually wrote. In addition to ill-health, bad eyes, and old age, I think a dry quill might be added to account for the poor signature. After all, everyone knew she had signed the warrant -- a clear signature wasn't needed.

 

Similar signatures from documents of that time show a much clearer signature that is the same as those she wrote as a teenager. CF Letter to the Earl of Essex, 17 September 1599 and Autograph Letter to James VI of Scotland, 6 January 1603. Both from above book.

 

Pryor's book is an invaluable source on the life and times of Elizabeth. Has many of the common hands of the era and much information on the political activities of that day. (Over 40 copies available on Amazon.)

 

Enjoy,

[mandarintje]

THANK YOU! how interesting your views are, Arthur, Caric and Randal !!!!

 

I have ordered that book now from Amazon (UK). Very interesting to ponder isn't it =)

[Randal6393]

Oh, yes, it's one of the best ones I have seen for late (after the flowering of printshops) hand-written materials. In addition to several Italic hands, written by various of the nobility of the world, the book has several examples of English batarde, or secretary, hand. At the time, the standard man's hand in England, Germany, and most of Italy was a secretary hand. Most of the documents in the book were written as hand-written letters, not for formal calligraphic display. To me, that is more of interest since it shows what a private hand can be.

 

Of particular interest to me is the letter dashed off by Queen Elizabeth at 2 AM on 11 April 1572. The letter stays the execution of the Duke of Norfolk and shows what a hurried Italic may degenerate to. Yet, for all the hurry, the hand is pretty legible and possesses character in its own right.

 

Enjoy,

[*david*]

Regarding the one that looks like Elizilbeth:

There is a short stroke on the left side of the a

and a taller stroke on the right side of the a

*and* other strokes joining those, where either the lines are narrow or the pen didn't lay down enough ink.