Simple question...

[BBB167893]

I looks the same, but with different pen widths. I have never seen an "e" that looks like that, not even from family members who write in block or semi-block letters.

Good eyes.

So, is one from the letter and one from Patsy's sample? I have not followed this much.

Right.

 

[Ravyn]

Who knows? That information wasn't provided. I guess this is supposed to be the 'how can you deny THIS' thread.

Does it bother you with someone just asking a simple question...Geez, it not like someone asked how many seconds are in a year....But have you ever examine the RN against PR...

 

[Tadpole12]

Hi Madeleine.

same font, style,
can't determine if they are written by the same individual.

 

[DeeDee249]

Hi Madeleine.

same font, style,
can't determine if they are written by the same individual.

I'd bet not many people make their "e" like that. The chance of the RN author and Patsy coincidentally making that same kind of unusual "e" is virtually non-existent, IMO.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

I'd bet not many people make their "e" like that. The chance of the RN author and Patsy coincidentally making that same kind of unusual "e" is virtually non-existent, IMO.

I just was wondering, where these two e's came from anyway.

Its presented as if one is PR and the other is from the RN but the source is not given.

 

[madeleine]

I just was wondering, where these two e's came from anyway.

Its presented as if one is PR and the other is from the RN but the source is not given.

Just what exactly is it that you want HOTYH,spill it out,I am not in the mood for subtle stuff.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

I looks the same, but with different pen widths. I have never seen an "e" that looks like that, not even from family members who write in block or semi-block letters.

So, is one from the letter and one from Patsy's sample? I have not followed this much.

I just was wondering, where these two e's came from anyway.

Its presented as if one is PR and the other is from the RN but the source is not given.

Just what exactly is it that you want HOTYH,spill it out,I am not in the mood for subtle stuff.

So, exactly where are these two e's found in the RN and in PR's writings? You know, which page, sentence, and word?

 

[Mira]

Same writer?Don't analyse,what does your first instinct tell you?

please give us a source for these 2 images.


without knowing where they came from, first instinct are pointless?

 

[Roy23]

please give us a source for these 2 images.


without knowing where they came from, first instinct are pointless?

I'll bite. They look very similar to me.

 

[madeleine]

So, exactly where are these two e's found in the RN and in PR's writings? You know, which page, sentence, and word?

Why?Does it really matter to you?
You know one's from PR writings and the other one from the RN.
Giving you the page,sentence and word won't change a thing but it would only mean to start another game which I don't want to.I already said what the point of this thread was/is .You can go ahead and say those "e"'s are not what I claim they are,I couldn't care less.Those who have studied both PR's writing and the RN know where they come from.

 

[madeleine]

please give us a source for these 2 images.


without knowing where they came from, first instinct are pointless?

Oh really?Can you elaborate?First instinct doesn't really imply a lot of knowledge....imo?

 

[BBB167893]

I just was wondering, where these two e's came from anyway.

Its presented as if one is PR and the other is from the RN but the source is not given.

I was going to mention that. No, the source is not given. PR denied that they were hers. But that's hardly rock-solid. Unless you believe that the document examiners falsified the charts in order to frame PR (and that hare-brained idea HAS been suggested), it's generally accepted that they are from the RN and PR, respectively and that they are one and the same.

 

[Annie Maude]

They are the same. My opinion, which I am entitled to.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Why?Does it really matter to you?
You know one's from PR writings and the other one from the RN.
Giving you the page,sentence and word won't change a thing but it would only mean to start another game which I don't want to.I already said what the point of this thread was/is .You can go ahead and say those "e"'s are not what I claim they are,I couldn't care less.Those who have studied both PR's writing and the RN know where they come from.

OMG this is cr@&.

I will assume from your post that the letters are not from PR. I recognize the style as belonging to the RN author but I was not able to find a PR exemplar of lower case 'e' that appeared similar. PR's lower case 'e' has a rounded lower left section, not square. Also the top portion of PR's lower case 'e' slants to the upper right, not to the lower right as you show.

My guess is that both of your e's are actually the same RN letter, but from two different scans of different resolutions and scale.

Until you 'man up' and provide the source, I'll assume my version is correct, as it involves separate observation of known PR exemplars, and I don't need to hide my sources like you do. Why is that? Three websleuthers want to know where these letters came from.

 

[madeleine]

OMG this is cr@&.

I will assume from your post that the letters are not from PR. I recognize the style as belonging to the RN author but I was not able to find a PR exemplar of lower case 'e' that appeared similar. PR's lower case 'e' has a rounded lower left section, not square. Also the top portion of PR's lower case 'e' slants to the upper right, not to the lower right as you show.

My guess is that both of your e's are actually the same RN letter, but from two different scans of different resolutions and scale.

Until you 'man up' and provide the source, I'll assume my version is correct, as it involves separate observation of known PR exemplars, and I don't need to hide my sources like you do. Why is that? Three websleuthers want to know where these letters came from.

:floorlaugh: Oh my God you are unbelievable!
Please get it,I won't play your game this time.

 

[madeleine]

Originally Posted by madeleine
You know one's from PR writings and the other one from the RN.

Originally Posted by Holdontoyourhat
I will assume from your post that the letters are not from PR.


What was that about smoke and mirrors?

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

:floorlaugh: Oh my God you are unbelievable!
Please get it,I won't play your game this time.

I suppose you won't answer the other poster's question either?

 

[BBB167893]

HOTYH, what difference does it make? We've established (or tried to) by now that this is not an attempt to restart the old "did PR or didn't she" argument. This was an attempt for people, who theoretically might not know who wrote those examples, to say the first thing which came into their minds.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

HOTYH, what difference does it make? We've established (or tried to) by now that this is not an attempt to restart the old "did PR or didn't she" argument. This was an attempt for people, who theoretically might not know who wrote those examples, to say the first thing which came into their minds.

Thats BS. Most who look at it are led to believe PR wrote one and the other is from the RN.

I believe in a previous post you stated this letter comes from a disputed PR exemplar. Which one? Whats the big deal?

Where's the beef? This poll is a CROCK.

 

[madeleine]

Thats BS. Most who look at it are led to believe PR wrote one and the other is from the RN.

I believe in a previous post you stated this letter comes from a disputed PR exemplar. Which one? Whats the big deal?

Where's the beef? This poll is a CROCK.

It really bothers you,I wonder why?Is it because it's so damn obvious that PR wrote the note?You're a coward.