A manuscript description may speak of a “hand.” That word concerns the writing on the page, and it should not be casually converted into the biography of a named individual. The distinction matters when a discussion moves from visible letterforms to who composed a text.
The Folger glossary notes that one person could learn more than one hand. It also distinguishes a holograph, written in its author’s handwriting. These terms help separate the production of a copy from authorship.
Consider this invented catalogue note: “The final six lines are in a different hand.” It supports a limited observation about those lines. It does not independently tell us the second writer’s name, date, motives, or relationship to the first writer.
Keep the claim at the right level
In a reading notebook, try two columns. On the left, record the description exactly enough to preserve its uncertainty. On the right, list questions it raises: was the change part of the original production, a correction, or a later addition? Leave those as questions until the catalogue or a specialist study supplies evidence.
Do not identify hands merely from differences in ink colour on a screen. Photography, fading, writing tools, and working conditions can complicate appearances.
A careful summary can say that a description identifies a change of hand while leaving the number and identities of the people involved unresolved. That is useful information, even without a name.