The long s(ſ) is often confused with the lower case f.

Because the use of the long s died out in the early 19th century, few are familiar with it.

It leads to many confusions. Now, in printed text, they are easy to tell apart-- the long s has no nub. In handwritten texts (such as early birth records), the two seem indistinguishable to me.

Is there any way to tell the two apart in handwritten texts?

  • 1
    Interesting possible overlap here between us and english.stackexchange.com
    – user104
    Commented Nov 21, 2012 at 20:04
  • Yes, but this also could apply to any language using a Latin Alphabet (including English). However, this question is focusing on the handwritten forms, whereas ELU SE does not.
    – Luke_0
    Commented Nov 21, 2012 at 20:11
  • Was just struck by the fact that the confusions you referred to were both on another stackexchange site (and both refer to printed documents)
    – user104
    Commented Nov 21, 2012 at 20:13
  • While linking to Wikipedia was a good idea, I do think it would have been nice to see some interesting graphic examples be provided as part of this question.
    – GeneJ
    Commented Nov 21, 2012 at 22:12
  • Well, take the last letter of the first numbered line here for example. genealogy.stackexchange.com/q/2077/56 Bgwiehle calls it an "s", but it could be "Lauf". Funny (no pun intended).
    – Luke_0
    Commented Nov 21, 2012 at 22:23

4 Answers 4


The U.S.A. Bill of Rights is a good example for study. We know exactly in what time frame and context it was written. At the top, we have the long S in

Congreſs of the United States

and the title is boldface italics (so to speak). This long-S does have a cross stroke, but it's not clear from the image whether that's a background line or actually is a cross stroke.

If you scan down through the document, you'll see many examples of double f, and near by examples of long-S-short-s. For example,

be subject for the same offence (Article 7 line 2)

is directly above

without due proceſs of law. (Article 7 line 3)

In this specific document, there is a difference between the two letters. Look at the direction of the lower part of the letter (clockwise vs. counter-clockwise). For a single isolated lower-case F, the descender is always formed counter-clockwise. For a long S, the descender is always formed clockwise. However, in the case of double-F, the first F's descender is clockwise, and the second F's descender is counter-clockwise.

I have never seen that distinction "officially" explained, but I have noticed it in other early 19th century American (USA) handwriting.

I think I have only seen the long-S as the first letter of a double-S combination. But I've only looked at USA handwriting, 1680-1880. Hopefully these minor distinctions will help you recognize the difference more easily!


According to The National Archives:

Don't get long s and f mixed up. The 'f' will have a cross stroke, even if it's hardly noticeable, and the context will make it clear whether it is a long 's' or an 'f'. Writers would often use both long and short 's', sometimes even in the same word.

  • 2
    The long s sometimes has a nub at the middle, and so it can appear even more like an elaborate lower case "f." (Even more difficult when talking about script.) See Wikipedia's entry. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_s
    – GeneJ
    Commented Nov 21, 2012 at 22:09
  • 1
    @GeneJ, I thought the long s only has a nub in the middle in typeface not in handwriting.
    – user104
    Commented Nov 22, 2012 at 9:36
  1. If the sample is large enough, you can identify all the occurrences of f and long s, thereby distinguishing the writers hand.

  2. If f and long s are almost identical, usually the word in question can be defined through trial and error. People and place names are most difficult.

  3. German-Americans continued using long s into the early 20th century. An ancestor of mine, named Elisabetha, was recorded in a book of tombstone inscriptions as "Chalberna". I didn't learn her true name until I visited the grave, and saw the readers had misinterpreted the gothic script and long s.

enter image description here


This hypothesis is based on a very limited dataset (one Welsh parish register circa 1800) but may be worth further testing.

It appears that a "long s" was not used when it would be the last letter of the word. If you could be certain that any such letters were f, then you have a good basis for comparison of individual writing styles.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.