# Why/How did 18th century people have such good handwriting? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [March 17, 2009, 2:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-how-did-18th-century-people-have-such-good-handwriting/489753 "2009-03-17T14:44:47Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 18\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![PhillyGuy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ed655f/32.png) [@PhillyGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PhillyGuy)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2014, 12:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-how-did-18th-century-people-have-such-good-handwriting/489753/41 "2014-03-29T12:41:03Z")
> [@jtur88](#): > > Almost without exception, they feature beautiful, graceful handwriting, and they were written by fairly ordinary people – certainly not by professional scribes who wrote documents for a living. You are making a good point. Cursive writing quality did deteriorate. The only question for me is when. I wonder if letters contained in sealed envelopes tended to have less careful handwriting than those open, such as in the case of post cards, or semi-open, as might be the case with stampless covers like this: [http://rlhstamps.com/rlhstamps\_all\_stamps/stampless%20covers/stampless\_to\_Holland\_from\_Bethleham\_\_c140\_3006.jpg](http://rlhstamps.com/rlhstamps_all_stamps/stampless%20covers/stampless_to_Holland_from_Bethleham__c140_3006.jpg) Someone could indeed make a study of this. ---
**Author:** ![naita](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/naita/32/5862_2.png) [@naita](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/naita)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2014, 2:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-how-did-18th-century-people-have-such-good-handwriting/489753/42 "2014-03-29T14:12:26Z")
I’ve read a lot of handwritten records from 19th century Norway, in addition to some ministers having horrible handwriting, some use crap ink or crap pens. And these were highly educated men writing official birth, marriage and burial records. ---
**Author:** ![naita](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/naita/32/5862_2.png) [@naita](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/naita)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2014, 2:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-how-did-18th-century-people-have-such-good-handwriting/489753/43 "2014-03-29T14:15:23Z")
> [@jtur88](#): > > Scroll down through this page, and look at the handwriting on post cards, > > [philatelic postcards 1860s - Google Search](https://www.google.com/search?q=philatelic+postcards+1860s&newwindow=1&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=9ic2U7iTLqyisASmvYHYDQ&ved=0CAYQ_AUoAQ&biw=1118&bih=624&dpr=0.9) > > Almost without exception, they feature beautiful, graceful handwriting, and they were written by fairly ordinary people – certainly not by professional scribes who wrote documents for a living. Selection bias. Why would would you post antique chickenscratches online? ---
**Author:** ![jtur88](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e9c0ed/32.png) [@jtur88](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jtur88)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2014, 3:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-how-did-18th-century-people-have-such-good-handwriting/489753/44 "2014-03-29T15:42:37Z")
> [@naita](#): > > Selection bias. Why would would you post antique chickenscratches online? Do you have time in your busy day to indicate whom you are accusing of selection bias? Me, or Google, or whom? And a definition of “antique chickenscratches” would be helpful, since you’re implying that I posted them online… ---
**Author:** ![naita](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/naita/32/5862_2.png) [@naita](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/naita)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2014, 4:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-how-did-18th-century-people-have-such-good-handwriting/489753/45 "2014-03-29T16:12:13Z")
> [@jtur88](#): > > Do you have time in your busy day to indicate whom you are accusing of selection bias? Me, or Google, or whom? And a definition of “antique chickenscratches” would be helpful, since you’re implying that I posted them online… Apologies for my terseness. Postcards that are preserved, then collected, then have the writing side scanned and put on the internet, are not a random sample of old timey handwriting. At each step there there’d be some bias towards the aesthetically pleasing. “antique chickenscratches” would be the type of old timey handwriting not present in the not so random sample your google search presents ---
**Author:** ![BMalion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/e274bd/32.png) [@BMalion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BMalion)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2014, 8:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-how-did-18th-century-people-have-such-good-handwriting/489753/46 "2014-03-29T20:58:05Z")
“The purfuit of happineff” ? ---
**Author:** ![aceplace57](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aceplace57/32/3500_2.png) [@aceplace57](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aceplace57)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2014, 10:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-how-did-18th-century-people-have-such-good-handwriting/489753/47 "2014-03-29T22:41:26Z")
The importance of daily practice can’t be repeated enough. My own handwriting deteriorated significantly after I took typing class. I’ve forgotten how to do most of my capital letters and print them. My lower case letters are still script. Letter writing used to be an important part of daily life. I can recall my grandmother sitting up late at night writing friends and relatives. She had fairly good handwriting and very legible. A lot better than mine ever was. ---
**Author:** ![Senegoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senegoid/32/6606_2.png) [@Senegoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Senegoid)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2014, 11:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-how-did-18th-century-people-have-such-good-handwriting/489753/48 "2014-03-29T23:06:18Z")
> [@BMalion](#): > > “The purfuit of happineff” > > ? FTFY: “The purſuit of happineſs” 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![BMalion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/e274bd/32.png) [@BMalion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BMalion)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2014, 6:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-how-did-18th-century-people-have-such-good-handwriting/489753/49 "2014-03-30T18:42:52Z")
> [@Senegoid](#): > > FTFY: “The purſuit of happineſs” 🙂 All your “S’s” look like “F’s”. ---
**Author:** ![Kenm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/bc79bd/32.png) [@Kenm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kenm)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2014, 9:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-how-did-18th-century-people-have-such-good-handwriting/489753/50 "2014-03-30T21:43:10Z")
On [**18th Century Ligatures and Fonts**](http://www.orbitals.com/self/ligature/ligature.htm). > [@](#): > > . . . 1. The long s (  ) is used in place of a lower case s, however > • (a) never use the long s at the end of a word or immediately before an apostrophe > 
(b) never use the long s immediately after an f (e.g., offset). > 
(c) never use the long s immediately before an f (e.g., transfer). > 
(d) never use the long s immediately before a b (e.g., husbandry. > 
(e) never use the long s immediately before a k (e.g., task. . . . ---
**Author:** ![CC](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f1d935/32.png) [@CC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CC)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2014, 9:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-how-did-18th-century-people-have-such-good-handwriting/489753/51 "2014-03-30T21:47:53Z")
> [@BMalion](#): > > All your “S’s” look like “F’s”. Yeah, well, it’s in, it’s very in. ---
**Author:** ![coffeeman1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/35a633/32.png) [@coffeeman1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/coffeeman1)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2014, 7:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-how-did-18th-century-people-have-such-good-handwriting/489753/52 "2014-03-31T07:16:44Z")
> [@Senegoid](#): > > It has been pointed out already that only a ſmaller number of ſuppoſedly “important” documents are commonly ſeen by many people today, and thoſe tend to have fine penmanſhip; and that documents were ſometimes ſent to a profeſsional ſcribe to be written. > > Of courſe, the authors of a lot of important documents _knew_ they were writing important documents (to-wit: Declaration of Independence; Conſtitution; etc.), and thoſe were certainly going to be profeſsionally inſcribed. And thoſe are the ones commonly diſplayed today. So it’s not exactly a coincidence that we, the hoi polloi, ſee a lot of the moſt finely inſcribed docs. yes, I understand someone has pointed this out, but that is only their opinion. In my opinion I think otherwise. I believe the curriculum in the 18th century would of taken handwriting very seriously and spent a lot of time practicing it, mastering it, drills, homework etc today we do not, today and the 20th century we took typing classes, computer classes, cursive and of course basically printing, a long with SOOO many other subjects to take up the class time. in the 18th century the subjects on offer were limited to todays standards so in my opinion handwriting , reading would of been given more hours a week compared to today,homework would of been given, writing drills, spelling, memorization etc. so in my opinion, a 13 year old child who is educated from the 18th century to a child today who is educated, I believe the 18th century child would of far superior artistic handwriting than a child today would not have even mastered cursive, and would just be printing in his own style. compare to the 18th century copperplate style or Italian style of the 18th century that writing looks better than todays writing. even a child could tell you the 18th century writing style looks prettier than the writing of today. sure documents from the 18th century or 17th century which are still around today, documents which were written by professional writers of course look amazing, but that’s not the point here, the point is. in the 18th century curriculum the style of writing taught to the children of that time was copperplate, Flourishing Alphabet,The Italian Hand and Round Hand. those styles are far superior to todays printing. so a child in school in the 18th century from 6 or 7 years till 13 or 14 would be learning that style! and that style is superior to todays style so YES, the writing pr the 18 century educated people was better than today’s writing from our educated people. printing vs copperhand. copperhand wins. ---
**Author:** ![coffeeman1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/35a633/32.png) [@coffeeman1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/coffeeman1)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2014, 7:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-how-did-18th-century-people-have-such-good-handwriting/489753/53 "2014-03-31T07:33:33Z")
yes, I understand someone has pointed this out, but that is only their opinion. In my opinion I think otherwise. I believe the curriculum in the 18th century would of taken handwriting very seriously and spent a lot of time practicing it, mastering it, drills and homework etc Today we do not, today and the 20th century we took typing classes, computer classes, cursive and of course basic printing, a long with SOOO many other subjects to take up the class time. In the 18th century the subjects on offer were limited to today’s standards so in my opinion handwriting and reading would of been given more hours a week compared to today. Homework would of been given such as writing drills, spelling and memorization etc. so in my opinion, a 13 year old child who was educated from the 18th century to a child today who is educated, I believe the 18th century child would of had far superior artistic handwriting than a child today. A child today would not have even mastered cursive, and would just be printing in his own style. Compare to the 18th century copperplate style or Italian style of the 18th century that writing looks better than today’s writing. Even a child could tell you the 18th century writing style looks prettier than the writing of today. sure documents from the 18th century or 17th century which are still around today, documents which were written by professional writers of course look amazing, but that’s not the point here, the point is. In the 18th century curriculum the style of writing taught to the children of that time was copperplate, Flourishing Alphabet,The Italian Hand and Round Hand. those styles are far superior to today’s printing. so a child in school in the 18th century from 6 or 7 years till 13 or 14 would be learning that style! and that style is superior to today’s style so YES, the writing in the 18 century educated people was better than today’s writing from our educated people. printing vs copperhand. copperhand wins. back then there were less distractions for children also. no internet, no sports, no games,. no street lights, so children were home before dark, and once in the house doing their studies! there would of been more importance placed on the childs studies compared to day due to less distractions and the victorian way of raising children. so, the average 13 year old child who went to school in the 18th century to the child today who goes to school the 18th century school child would of had far superior hand writing than today’s child. ---
**Author:** ![Bridget\_Burke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7cd45c/32.png) [@Bridget\_Burke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bridget_Burke)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2014, 12:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-how-did-18th-century-people-have-such-good-handwriting/489753/54 "2014-03-31T12:04:53Z")
> [@naita](#): > > Apologies for my terseness. Postcards that are preserved, then collected, then have the writing side scanned and put on the internet, are not a random sample of old timey handwriting. At each step there there’d be some bias towards the aesthetically pleasing. > > “antique chickenscratches” would be the type of old timey handwriting not present in the not so random sample your google search presents Much of the “bad” older handwriting discussed was found in diaries, marginal notes & preliminary versions. That is, things not meant to be read by others. Those who really wanted Matilda to know they were thinking fondly of her while enjoying the vistas of Ausable Chasm would probably manage to write a few legible lines on the back of the postcard. Nowadays, they’d Tweet her & attach a photo… –Ron Chernow had access to George Washington’s papers for his excellent biography. GW (& his contemporaries) used a fair number of abbreviations in less formal correspondence–a bit like text speak. [Washington’s writing](http://gwpapers.virginia.edu/documents/george-washington-to-anthony-whitting/) isn’t hard to decipher. But he was hardly “average”… (While decrying the lowered standards of modern education, one ought to avoid phrases like “would of.” And proper use of caps & smalls is today’s version of having a legible hand.) ---
**Author:** ![HoneyBadgerDC](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/honeybadgerdc/32/1033_2.png) [@HoneyBadgerDC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HoneyBadgerDC)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2014, 12:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-how-did-18th-century-people-have-such-good-handwriting/489753/55 "2014-03-31T12:51:03Z")
I went to Catholic school, we were only allowed to write with shaffer pens which are like fountain pens. I had ver decent hand writing until I started using a ball point. If I pick up a shaffer type pen even today my handwriting is decent, I cannot even read my own writing with a ball point. ---
**Author:** ![psychonaut](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/psychonaut/32/4655_2.png) [@psychonaut](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/psychonaut)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2014, 8:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-how-did-18th-century-people-have-such-good-handwriting/489753/56 "2014-04-01T08:45:38Z")
Though he’s quite a bit earlier than the 18th century, Thomas Aquinas was notorious among his contemporaries, and among modern-day medievalists, for his illegible handwriting. Here’s [a sample autograph](http://www.fordham.edu/images/undergraduate/academicaffairs/web_development/site_files/handwriting_st_thomas.jpg), and [an article on his penmanship and writing process](http://www2.idehist.uu.se/distans/ilmh/Ren/soc-memory-aquinas.htm) which begins, > [@Mary J. Carruthers](#): > > We know a good deal about the actual procedures that Thomas Aquinas followed in composing his works, thanks in part to the full accounts we have from the hearings held for his canonization, and in part to the remarkable survival of several pages of autograph drafts of certain of his early works. Both sources of material have received a thorough analysis from the paleographic scholar, Antoine Dondaine. Dondaine’s work confirmed the existence, alluded to many times in the contemporary accounts, of a group of three or four secretaries who took down Thomas’s compositions in a fair hand from his own dictation. The autographs are written in _littera inintelligibilis_, a kind of shorthand that fully lives up to its name (Dondaine says that the great nineteenth-century editor, Uccelli, lost his eyesight scrutinizing these drafts) for it was not designed to be read by anyone other than the author himself. As Dondaine has reconstructed the process of composing the _Summa contra gentiles_, an early work for which a number of autograph leaves exist, Thomas wrote first in _littera inintelligibilis_ and then summoned one of his secretaries to take down the text in a legible hand while Thomas read his own autograph aloud. When one scribe tired, another took over. ---
**Author:** ![Siam\_Sam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/d78d45/32.png) [@Siam\_Sam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Siam_Sam)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2014, 6:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-how-did-18th-century-people-have-such-good-handwriting/489753/57 "2014-04-02T06:51:25Z")
Practice. I used to have really good handwriting. It’s still good, but I have noticed a deterioration with the advent of e-mail and such. ---
**Author:** ![No\_Wikipedia\_Cites](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/94ad74/32.png) [@No\_Wikipedia\_Cites](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/No_Wikipedia_Cites)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2014, 8:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-how-did-18th-century-people-have-such-good-handwriting/489753/58 "2014-04-24T20:02:54Z")
> [@Hello\_Again](#): > > Check out Thomas Jefferson’s [draft copy](http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/treasures/images/decp1.jpg) – his penmanship was nothing special. Much like many modern writers, he intermixes cursive and block lettering. I like where he tried make UNITED STATES OF AMERICA look fancy and important… in a wandering, uneven way. He used ALLCAPS/SMALLcaps on purpose, based on 18c conventions. If it was a draft, it wasn’t supposed to be perfectly lined up. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-how-did-18th-century-people-have-such-good-handwriting/489753.md?page=2)