Preferably, this would a historical figure of some notoriety like a King, Prince or scholar. But it could also be an ancient scribe provided that he can be identified by name as an individual person.
The Vatican has a lot of old paperwork - I heard that they have Henry VII original marriage annulment request, but I’m not sure if we know if Henry wrote it himself or if not, who specifically did. The article indicates that they have stuff going back to the 8th century but it doesn’t say what the earliest document is for which we know the scribe as opposed to knowing the content author.
What about monumental inscriptions that were done in stone? Does carving a message or name into a marble column or building facade with a chisel count as “handwriting”?
Well, the qualifier is that the person actually wrote (or chiselled) the text himself. I would assume that powerful figures normally would not be involved personally in building a column.
Gislebertus hoc fecit, but I’m sure there’s much older stuff. Did Egyptian scribes put their names on things?
Unfortunately, any ancient person of note would have used scribes the way we use printing presses. Original manuscripts held no value to the author after he had a few “clean” copies made. I also suspect the custom of handwriting one’s name on a contract is a relatively recent replacement for the use of official seals.
Some scribes recorded their own names. Ahmes for example
Googling a bit, it appears that the oldest surviving signature of a notable historical figure may be by El Cid (“Ego Ruderico”- “I, Rodrigo” in Latin) from a diploma issued in 1098.
My guess is (unless we extend this to carved inscriptions and the like) someone from Han or Jin China like Wang Xizhi who would have been collected/preserved early on (if any of his stuff made it-- I don’t know-- this is a long-pass guess)
signed classical Greek pottery?
Ulfreida-- that’s a good idea! There are a number of “ painted this” inscriptions on those.
He’s some 1900 years later then Ahmes. And I don’t think Ahmes is the earliest example of an Egyptian scribe giving his name.
I wrote once about the procedures in place for editing, signing-off, and closure on a manuscript and its sections at a medieval scriptorium, and who did what. Editors/scriptors did sign their work.
According to an Irish brewer, the winner appears to be one “Adu the scribe,” who wrote his name on a clay tablet c. 2600 BCE.
Quick google shows the answer is on some obscure website nobody’s ever heard of:
Abu the scribe is the answer, source is Guiness book of world records.
I’d just like to point out that Guinness should not be taken as definitive citation, particularly for this type of datum. It’s better than “the Internet,” but still.
Wow, this might be the start of a new thread, but:
Why would the Guiness Book of World Records not be considered a reliable source?
To some people (myself included), it lost most of its credibility some years ago when they started including really trivial records that only existed because no-one else had tried to do them yet (“most people dancing to a pop song at one time” sort of thing) - a long way from the “World’s tallest person” or “Fastest racing horse” or “Oldest living creatre” sort of stuff they were once renowned for, IMHO.
So..if I am understanding this correctly, they’ve lost their credibility on their most recent (e.g. 10% of the records set in the past couple of years) records, which then destroys their credibility on what they’ve done in the past 100 or so years?
Eh, I don’t see how that hurts their credibility in the sense we’re discussing. That is whether something they say is true factually.
How “worthy” something is of being considered a world record isn’t really a factual question.
Although it does not answer the OP, I think, from the earliest surviving papayri and tablets, it has been possible to identify individual scribes, although not by name.