paleography

And there may still be scope for a paper that explicitly examines the paleography lists for inspiration.

There's actually an entire thing that historians need to learn called Paleography since old documents tend to be nearly incomprehensible to laypeople.

I've been studying paleography for about a year now, and I really don't find this to be true.

Besides the paleography, I had to trace the origin & date of the paper used, which was possible from watermarks.

Archive paleography is substantially broader than that.

> In the future, cursive will have to be taught to scholars the way Elizabethan secretary hand or paleography is today.

But how do you certify in subjects like abstract algebra or Byzantine paleography or chemical engineering?

I once spent a summer helping a library write one-sentence summaries for medieval Latin books, and all the abbreviations and ligatures made the paleography really tough!

But the task requested by the National Archives is more akin to paleography where you can expect each author or work to have their own (region-based/family-based) handwriting that requires decipherment, even for experts.

(Source: wife studied paleography at Oxford, we have lots of fun books about this.

There's a reddit thread [0] that might be some of what I saw, and my wife does paleography work where she runs across books of accounts that are rendered in Roman numerals, because that's how formal accounts were prepared, even if the actual accounting was done by other means.

(As someone ignorant of both European and Chinese paleography, China's historical text digitization projects seem to be far in advance of Europe's - I was able download 200k classical chinese poems like it's nothing in a nicely formatted json archive on GitHub, for instance).

This has happened repeatedly as handwriting norms have changed enough to require conscious study, often called "paleography" when it's focused on reading older manuscripts.

Full quote: > Granted, Monte had unusually legible handwriting, but even “easy” early modern paleography like this is still the sort of thing that requires days or weeks of training to get the hang of.

You do not have a care-free option, to be able to understand that "physical" mistake you'd still need to read the source, which means you still need those days/weeks of training > none of them that I'm aware of are good enough to deal with difficult paleography And you haven't demonstrated anything re.

For a case study would be nice if the case were actually studied… > had unusually legible handwriting, but even “easy” early modern paleography like this is still the sort of thing that requires days or weeks of training to get the hang of.

Paleography, transcription, and translation are hellishly difficult to learn and really make it difficult for interested people to explore the archive.

Paleography is a different animal than handwriting analysis.

The article makes it sound like Ms Watson has a totally unique and unusual skill but there is actually a whole field of study around interpreting old handwritten texts (Paleography).