Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - horselydown86

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 ... 382
1
I should add that normally the plea in a debt like this (when there are more than one defendant) says debent & iniuste detinent  = they owe and unjustly detain.

In this case the debent has been scrubbed out, leaving only & [sic] iniuste detinent.

Omitting the redundant &, this = they unjustly detain.

This clearly has a significance, but what it is can't be discerned.

2
Christopher Stone is taking action to recover 8 pounds which he says are unjustly detained by John Wrathe and his wife Mary.  Mary is the executrice of William fforde.

Because it specifies that Mary was William fforde's executrice it's likely that the debt was originally incurred by fforde.

However, nothing in the record discloses this debt's origin.  It may be nothing to do with the house and lands.

John Wrathe and Mary didn't come to court.  The rest of the entry concerns the actions to be taken by the sheriff.

3
Handwriting Deciphering & Recognition / Re: Latin probate & postscripts 1625- 1646
« on: Wednesday 24 April 24 13:03 BST (UK)  »
Now you point it out, I see the capital P in prefectus...

No, it's not a capital P.  It's a small p with above it a standard contraction mark to indicate that the letters re are omitted.  Attached is another example of this contraction in which the contraction mark can be more clearly distinguished from the p.  The word is p(re)sentes.

4
Handwriting Deciphering & Recognition / Re: Latin probate & postscripts 1625- 1646
« on: Wednesday 24 April 24 05:57 BST (UK)  »
In the third postscript:

The missing word is:  decree

The first word in the bracket is:  whereof

I'd incline towards:  Turfett

It could well be Chancello(ur), making allowances for a not particularly well-formed a and c.

In the first postscript the highlighted word in the first line is probably:  p(re)fectus

If the problem word in the probate is the last word of the image's third last line, it is:  Com(m)issaq(ue)

5
There's quite a lot of unhelpful interference from other lines, but I would say it's:

...decimo octavo die Mens(i)s Maii...

Therefore, 18 May 1677.

6
Handwriting Deciphering & Recognition / Re: Purchase of Land 1717
« on: Sunday 21 April 24 18:13 BST (UK)  »
Attempt with some questions:

...Berrynole Close being 42 acres but ye 3d Note underwritten [?tt(es)]

^the 2 [?] Notes^

of half an acre & [Sub?itte] be more lessened by half an acre but
[yn = then?] 2 roods

come to this ffarme in Place of ye 2 last menc(i)oned roods at present [?]

Note of the last Mentioned Close there are 3 acres belonging to the

lower Copyhold held by Jack [Popty?] But
[yn = then?] Lawrence Ring his te(neme)nt has

3 acres belonging to this ffarme in a Close called Down Shard Close

Note also there is In Berrynole Close another rood of [S(i)r?] Thomas [Malett(es)?]...

7
Handwriting Deciphering & Recognition / Re: 1738 Admin. Checking names please
« on: Monday 15 April 24 04:50 BST (UK)  »
Hi goldie.

The first name appears to be William Dangar.

The second forename is John, but the surname is difficult.

It looks as though the writer has added another flourish in the same vein as the one which comes from the third letter of Elisabeth in line 1.

To me, it's more likely that it comes from the third letter of this name; therefore I don't think the last letter is g.

The name could possibly be Panier?, but what is happening at the end isn't clear.

What is your idea?

8
Handwriting Deciphering & Recognition / Re: 1554 will beginning & Probate
« on: Friday 12 April 24 14:43 BST (UK)  »
The probate is straightforward boilerplate.  The only excitement lies in untangling the many crossings-out and insertions, particularly as they affect the probate date.

The day is the seventh day of July.

The year appears to finish as 1561 (mill(es)imo qui(n)gen(tesimo) lxj).

However it's possible to construe it having been 1554 in one of the prior, crossed-out attempts (mill(es)imo qui(n)gen(tesimo) liiij).

Administration was to the executor named in the testament.

Note that some people might wish to argue that the final iteration of the date ends in lvj rather than lxj, making 1556.

9
London and Middlesex / Re: John Knyffe 1469!
« on: Friday 12 April 24 04:08 BST (UK)  »
Thomas Pymme 1549/50 Isolden (Islington) Middlesex (National Archives PROB 11-33-54).
'First I will and bequeath my tenement I now dwell in in Iseldon with [?] acres and a half of land which were some time my cousin Knyfys'.

Regarding the ?, it is vij = seven.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 ... 382