Making one's mark instead of signing.

[Gwyn in Kent]

Yesterday I found a record in Chichester Record Office for the second marriage of a direct ancestor in the late 1700s.
The witnesses made their mark as a cross in the parish church register, but bride and groom each had a circle instead, by their names.
The groom Robert also signed with a circle when he witnessed his stepdaughter's marriage in a different church.
Is there any significance in these different ways of leaving their mark, please?

Gwyn

[webwiz]

I suppose that they could make any mark they liked, but a cross was normal.

[Olde Crone Holden]

Gwyn

I was searching through a parish record for my ancestors when I came across the Oath of Allegiance, signed by every man in the village.

What surprised me was how many "ordinary" men could sign their names.

But even those who could not sign their names made elaborate marks, very few were simply crosses and I assumed that they were used to "making their mark" in their every day life and it was necessary for one man's mark to be different from another man's mark - maybe as a sign of possession.

OC

[Guy]

The use of the cross was often simply a convenience in transcribed records.
Many men would have their own particular mark, even back to Roman times, essential for those who were paid by piece work.

What surprises me is the number of people who still do not realise that our ancestors were in many cases literate or semi-literate and fully capable of signing their names.

It is not realised that often a mark was made because the individual was told to make a mark. This was displayed to me during my school years when 16 year olds were told to make their mark when in the cadets. Many made a mark rather than signed their name even though they all could read and write perfectly well.
It boils down to obeying authority.

The peasants revolt of 1381 was, it is now believed, organised by the written word.
Cheers
Guy

[Olde Crone Holden]

I entirely agree with what Guy says and I think there was a further cause for making a mark rather than signing, which was that the lower orders didn't want their betters to know that they could read and write - many employers did not like the idea of the working classes getting an education and getting above themselves.

OC

[AntonyM]

As above ... there is a lot of evidence that documents with "the mark of ...." may give no indication about the education/literacy of the "marker". I have seen an example of a schoolmaster who signed a document with "his mark" in the 19th century and yet I have seen pages of a school log book beautifully written in copperplate handwriting by the same man some years before.

In many cases making a mark on a document was just a form of shorthand.

[Janet]

Yes, it never ceases to amaze me how many people still think that the mark is a sign of illiteracy. They did as they were told back then." Put your mark here" and so they did! I have many in my own tree who have put down their mark in one register to sign their name in a beautiful hand as a witness to a marriage somewhere else. I also have seen different marks.

Janet

[Gwyn in Kent]

Thank you all for your comments.
I didn't see one more entry in any of the registers viewed which had any marks other than a cross, so I wondered if I was missing something with my ancestor.
I can appreciate that a mark might be as individual as they wished though.

Gwyn

[Christine in Herts]

In some cases - though this is extremely unlikely in the context of a Christian marriage registration, of course - people didn't want to us a cross for their mark in case it was construed as Christian, even though it was usually made as X rather than +. I believe that Jewish people, for example, would often use a circle.

I can't remember where I picked up this piece of info, so it could easily be myth. In the dim recesses of my mind, I think, though, that it might have been during a WDYTYA, involving Jewish ancestry.

Christine

[JudithM]

In some cases - though this is extremely unlikely in the context of a Christian marriage registration, of course - people didn't want to us a cross for their mark in case it was construed as Christian, even though it was usually made as X rather than +. I believe that Jewish people, for example, would often use a circle.

I can't remember where I picked up this piece of info, so it could easily be myth. In the dim recesses of my mind, I think, though, that it might have been during a WDYTYA, involving Jewish ancestry.

Christine

I think it was the WDYTYA prog about the jewish ancestry of "Dot Cotton" out of Eastenders (can't remember the actresses name). She was also the one who expressed surprise that the names of her jewish ancestors were from the Old Testament :D

[Christine in Herts]

I think it was the WDYTYA prog about the jewish ancestry of "Dot Cotton" out of Eastenders (can't remember the actresses name). She was also the one who expressed surprise that the names of her jewish ancestors were from the Old Testament :D

I think you're right - that does tie in with my memories.

Christine

[clematised]

June Brown is Dot Cotton

Edna