ABSTRACT
In courts of law, expert evidence is frequently given on handwriting, and the giver of that evidence is not unnaturally described as a handwriting expert. This epithet can be misleading. It seems to imply that here is a person who knows all about handwriting. He knows how many different scripts there are now and in the past, how they have developed, how they are taught, how they are affected by difficult circumstances, why one person writes the way he does, and so on. In fact, this is not the case. It is true that there are people who study the development of scripts used by different peoples, others who study handwriting to discover the personality of the writer, and others who specialize in the teaching of handwriting. All of these can be described as experts in handwriting, but that description when used in courts of law applies to those who perform a task within clear limitations. They are concerned with identification of the writer of a piece of questioned writing, the recognition of simulated signatures, and other related matters.
