Author Topic: 1625 Administration in Latin  (Read 819 times)

Offline smudwhisk

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,864
  • Whiskey (1997-2018)
    • View Profile
1625 Administration in Latin
« on: Friday 13 April 18 16:08 BST (UK) »
Would anyone be able to transcribe this short Administration for me please as while I can pick out a few words, I'm struggling to read much of it because it is in Latin (if it was in English wouldn't have any issues).

It relates to Hellena Ffosdicke of Sudbury from 1625.  I believe it starts with "ultimate (day) of the month ..." and I can pick out a reference to a Henry and Margaret but am struggling with the surname.

If anyone can help I'd be grateful.  I've a number of Fosdi(c)k(e) Wills from Sudbury for this period but am struggling with this Administration.

Thanks

Nicola
(KENT) Lingwell, Rayment (BUCKS) Read, Hutchins (SRY) Costin, Westbrook (DOR) Gibbs, Goreing (DUR) Green (ESX) Rudland, Malden, Rouse, Boosey (FIFE) Foulis, Russell (NFK) Johnson, Farthing, Purdy, Barsham (GLOS) Collett, Morris, Freebury, May, Kirkman (HERTS) Winchester, Linford (NORTHANTS) Bird, Brimley, Chater, Wilford, Read, Chapman, Jeys, Marston, Lumley (WILTS) Arden, Whatley, Batson, Gleed, Greenhill (SOM) Coombs, Watkins (RUT) Stafford (BERKS) Sansom, Angel, Young, Stratton, Weeks, Day

Offline horselydown86

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,418
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: 1625 Administration in Latin
« Reply #1 on: Friday 13 April 18 17:17 BST (UK) »
I read the names as Henry Canward and Margaret his wife.

It then gives the relationship to the deceased.  I believe the word as written is filie, which is masculine in the vocative case.

However I suspect it's meant to be filiae, which is feminine, indicating that Margaret is the natural daughter of Hellena (because the vocative case makes no sense in this context).

The Latin for this section is:

...Co(m)missa fuit henrico Canward
et Margaret' eius ux' filie nat'
dict' def'...


The date is:

Ultimo die mens(i)s Annoque
pred'...


= The last day of the month and year aforesaid

Don't ink anything in until Bookbox has had a look at it.

Offline Bookbox

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 7,896
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: 1625 Administration in Latin
« Reply #2 on: Friday 13 April 18 18:51 BST (UK) »
I agree with horselydown86.

... henrico Canward
et Margaret(e) eius ux(ori) filie na(tur)ali
d(i)c(t)e def(uncte) &c.


... to Henry Canward and to Margaret his wife, the natural daughter of the said deceased etc. ...

(the words Margarete, uxori, filie and naturali are all dative case = to/for)

Offline smudwhisk

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,864
  • Whiskey (1997-2018)
    • View Profile
Re: 1625 Administration in Latin
« Reply #3 on: Friday 13 April 18 20:23 BST (UK) »
Thanks Horsleydown and Bookbox, most appreciated.  I had a feeling it did say Margaret was daughter of but it wasn't very clear.  Interesting. 

I only know of one Hellene Fosdicke in Sudbury and she was the widow of Thomas who died in 1594.  Thomas' Will only mentions his wife and son John so had assumed that they only had the one child.  However, Thomas' son John died in 1620 and his grandson John in 1628 (John's sisters didn't marry until the late 1620s/early 1630s so he was relatively young when he died).  John junior's Will mentions his uncle of Sudbury.  Its not clear again as its a registered copy Norwich Consistory Court Will but initially I thought it might be Haiward and there was a marriage in Belchamp Otton which would tie in with his mother's maiden name at the right time to be an uncle (not that I know who his mother's parents or siblings were yet).  But looking at it again, I think it probably is Canwarde.  It appears twice in the Will, neither has a first name, but mentions his uncles "two children" in one place.  I thought it may have been an H at the beginning rather than a C because the C of Children is more "flowery" but looking at it again and other capital Cs in the Will I think it probably is Canwarde. 

There are burials in Sudbury St Peter for a Henry Cannard in 1653 and Widow Cannard the following year which is probably them.  There is also a marriage in 1640 at Acton which virtually borders Sudbury of an Anne Cannard who could of course be one of their two children.  Sadly Sudbury St Peter records are missing prior to 1652 although there are some Archdeacon's Transcripts earlier and neither Henry nor Margaret leaves a Will as far as it can.  However it definitely does now look like Thomas and Hellene probably had more than one child and Thomas just doesn't mention them in his Will. 

The Fosdi(c)k(e)s appear to have been in Sudbury St Peter sadly and we've only been able to piece them together from Wills.

Thanks again for the help.
(KENT) Lingwell, Rayment (BUCKS) Read, Hutchins (SRY) Costin, Westbrook (DOR) Gibbs, Goreing (DUR) Green (ESX) Rudland, Malden, Rouse, Boosey (FIFE) Foulis, Russell (NFK) Johnson, Farthing, Purdy, Barsham (GLOS) Collett, Morris, Freebury, May, Kirkman (HERTS) Winchester, Linford (NORTHANTS) Bird, Brimley, Chater, Wilford, Read, Chapman, Jeys, Marston, Lumley (WILTS) Arden, Whatley, Batson, Gleed, Greenhill (SOM) Coombs, Watkins (RUT) Stafford (BERKS) Sansom, Angel, Young, Stratton, Weeks, Day