RootsChat.Com

Old Photographs, Recognition, Handwriting Deciphering => Handwriting Deciphering & Recognition => Topic started by: toby webb on Thursday 23 July 20 16:41 BST (UK)

Title: Will of Thomas Smith of Wanborough, Wilts. 1689
Post by: toby webb on Thursday 23 July 20 16:41 BST (UK)
It's a while since i had a go at a will, so being rusty, I would be delighted with some help.
Firstl the few words on line 6 following Jesus Christ.
Thanks, Toby.
Title: Re: Will of Thomas Smith of Wanborough, Wilts. 1689
Post by: JenB on Thursday 23 July 20 16:44 BST (UK)
.....to have full pardon......
Title: Re: Will of Thomas Smith of Wanborough, Wilts. 1689
Post by: toby webb on Thursday 23 July 20 16:53 BST (UK)
So easy after the event. Thanks.
Line 23 involves a man's name. I know how it has been transcribed but that doesn't
seem correct. I don't want to prejudice any opinions but will reveal all later.
Thanks, T.
Title: Re: Will of Thomas Smith of Wanborough, Wilts. 1689
Post by: horselydown86 on Thursday 23 July 20 17:49 BST (UK)
I know how it has been transcribed but that doesn't
seem correct. I don't want to prejudice any opinions but will reveal all later.

In this case it would be useful to know.  The reason is that there is a contraction mark across the d.  Some contraction marks tell the reader what letters have been omitted, but this one doesn't.

I would say that the letters written are L-o-u/n/v-d-a-s, but that is only part of the story.  The contraction might be trivial - eg double-d - or it could be major.

Another matter - I believe the capital is an L.

I can see in the first clip the words: ...ever Lasting Life...

Do these capital Ls fully match the capital in this word?
Title: Re: Will of Thomas Smith of Wanborough, Wilts. 1689
Post by: toby webb on Thursday 23 July 20 18:37 BST (UK)
 Thanks for the response.
I first came across this will in Wiltshire Notes & Queries Vol II June 1896 p82
  "    .... and to son in law Thomas Lovday's two daughters ......"
The spelling throughout the will is imaginitive  eg 'to' instead of 'two'.
However I found it difficult to read Lovday but will be interested in what you experts
have to say.
Many thanks. Toby.
Title: Re: Will of Thomas Smith of Wanborough, Wilts. 1689
Post by: toby webb on Thursday 23 July 20 18:40 BST (UK)
Sorry. I missed the last question. I am quite happy with     ' L'
T
Title: Re: Will of Thomas Smith of Wanborough, Wilts. 1689
Post by: horselydown86 on Thursday 23 July 20 18:55 BST (UK)
I first came across this will in Wiltshire Notes & Queries Vol II June 1896 p82
  "    .... and to son in law Thomas Lovday's two daughters ......"

Thanks Toby.

This is where it becomes tricky - we have a surname with an unspecified contraction.

There is a y in the words ...when thay shall atain... so it definitely doesn't end in y.

Nevertheless, it is quite plausible - taking into account the contraction gives us Lov(e)das meaning Lovedays (or even Lov(e)da(y)s, but I think that less likely).

The next thing for you to do is check whether the name is repeated anywhere in the probate, or is to be found among the witnesses or appraisers (if there's an inventory).

If it isn't, the best way to proceed is to direct your research as if it were Loveday.  Look for wills or legal disputes in the area involving that name.  You might find a reference which will confirm the connection.

ADDED:

Or a marriage record, of course.
Title: Re: Will of Thomas Smith of Wanborough, Wilts. 1689
Post by: toby webb on Thursday 23 July 20 21:15 BST (UK)
Thanks  horselydown86. I have taken the liberty of re arranging the page to give me the attached.
I would be pleased if you are able to confirm Mary & Alice as the daughter's names for

Mary Loveday baptised at Wanborough 30 April 1680 d/o Thomas
Allice Loveday baptised at Little Hinton 11 June 1685 d/o Thomas & Ann

That would fit but I like to be more certain than that. I have seen so many family trees that are absolutely ridiculous.
Would be pleased for any further comments. T.

Title: Re: Will of Thomas Smith of Wanborough, Wilts. 1689
Post by: Bookbox on Thursday 23 July 20 21:31 BST (UK)
It reads ... to dafters marey and alce ...

So Mary and Allice would seem to be correct equivalents.
Title: Re: Will of Thomas Smith of Wanborough, Wilts. 1689
Post by: youngtug on Thursday 23 July 20 21:31 BST (UK)
Thomas Loveday married Ann Smith 9-June 1679.
Title: Re: Will of Thomas Smith of Wanborough, Wilts. 1689
Post by: toby webb on Thursday 23 July 20 21:44 BST (UK)
HOT OFF THE PRESS.
Working on the will of another Thomas Smith also of Wanborough I read witnessed on 13 December 1706 ------Thomas Lovday!

Thanks for the other connections. Pity second names were rare and so many names the same generation after generation, cousins too.
I must now get back to the original will as more lines to be completed.
T
Title: Re: Will of Thomas Smith of Wanborough, Wilts. 1689
Post by: toby webb on Thursday 23 July 20 21:52 BST (UK)
Can anyone help with the furniture etc on lines 20, 21 & 22.
Thanks, Toby.
Title: Re: Will of Thomas Smith of Wanborough, Wilts. 1689
Post by: Treetotal on Thursday 23 July 20 22:33 BST (UK)
Could be six G???? Stouls/ stools.
Carol
Title: Re: Will of Thomas Smith of Wanborough, Wilts. 1689
Post by: youngtug on Thursday 23 July 20 22:40 BST (UK)
Joint [jint] stool maybe
     http://wildwoodantiques.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/English-vintage-antique-oak-joint-stool-1.jpg
Title: Re: Will of Thomas Smith of Wanborough, Wilts. 1689
Post by: goldie61 on Thursday 23 July 20 23:20 BST (UK)
... a bead  ie , a bed

...six gind stouls.....  it looks more like an 'e' at the end of the word though. Possibly a 'd', so  'joined'? - I've come across this before with 'joined' beds etc - ie 'jointed' - a better class of furniture

...one gind ocken chaier. ie a joined oaken chair

Just love the spellings here Toby!! :)

Title: Re: Will of Thomas Smith of Wanborough, Wilts. 1689
Post by: horselydown86 on Friday 24 July 20 05:58 BST (UK)
...six gind stouls.....  it looks more like an 'e' at the end of the word though.

Looking at other examples of end-word e, I also think they are e's.

I expect the meaning is the same:   gine = join = (shorthand for) joind or joint
Title: Re: Will of Thomas Smith of Wanborough, Wilts. 1689
Post by: Karen McDonald on Friday 24 July 20 06:55 BST (UK)
As a Shakespeare fan:  ;D

https://www.shakespeare.org.uk/explore-shakespeare/blogs/shakespeare-100-objects-joint-stool/
Title: Re: Will of Thomas Smith of Wanborough, Wilts. 1689
Post by: goldie61 on Friday 24 July 20 07:32 BST (UK)
As a Shakespeare fan:  ;D

https://www.shakespeare.org.uk/explore-shakespeare/blogs/shakespeare-100-objects-joint-stool/

What fun Karen!
That site is a mine of information.  :)
Title: Re: Will of Thomas Smith of Wanborough, Wilts. 1689
Post by: Karen McDonald on Friday 24 July 20 07:50 BST (UK)
As a Shakespeare fan:  ;D

https://www.shakespeare.org.uk/explore-shakespeare/blogs/shakespeare-100-objects-joint-stool/

What fun Karen!
That site is a mine of information.  :)

 ;D It's lovely. I could spend all day on there...
Title: Re: Will of Thomas Smith of Wanborough, Wilts. 1689
Post by: toby webb on Friday 24 July 20 08:50 BST (UK)
Thank you all collectively. Interesting how this has developped.
The next bit is a signature.
Are we off to the races again? T
Title: Re: Will of Thomas Smith of Wanborough, Wilts. 1689
Post by: goldie61 on Friday 24 July 20 08:54 BST (UK)
Richard Hokins was my first thought.
Might be a 'g' at the end instead of an 's'.

now not too sure about the first letter as an 'h'. The 'h' in 'Richard' is very different.

Is this the signature of a witness? - in which case there will probably be no more of his writing to compare letters? Or has it been written by the writer of the will? can you tell?
Title: Re: Will of Thomas Smith of Wanborough, Wilts. 1689
Post by: toby webb on Friday 24 July 20 09:08 BST (UK)
We are lucky for a change.
Extract from the text
T
Title: Re: Will of Thomas Smith of Wanborough, Wilts. 1689
Post by: youngtug on Friday 24 July 20 09:16 BST (UK)
Eakins
Title: Re: Will of Thomas Smith of Wanborough, Wilts. 1689
Post by: horselydown86 on Friday 24 July 20 14:12 BST (UK)
A case exists to say it is Vokins.

See:  http://www.rootschat.com/links/01pr3/

Eldest son of the Richard with the PCC will of 1646 is another Richard.

ADDED:

There's a good chance RV wrote the will.
Title: Re: Will of Thomas Smith of Wanborough, Wilts. 1689
Post by: youngtug on Friday 24 July 20 14:23 BST (UK)
Of course, I should have thought. ::) :-\I have been doing some research into Joan Vokins, nee' Bunce, sister in law of Oliver Sansum, a well known Quaker.
https://www.oxforddnb.com/view/10.1093/ref:odnb/9780198614128.001.0001/odnb-9780198614128-e-28351
Title: Re: Will of Thomas Smith of Wanborough, Wilts. 1689
Post by: horselydown86 on Friday 24 July 20 14:28 BST (UK)
Small world sometimes...
Title: Re: Will of Thomas Smith of Wanborough, Wilts. 1689
Post by: toby webb on Friday 24 July 20 16:01 BST (UK)
Thanks. I am very pleased how well things are going. Looking again at the last clip,
how would the adj. attached to brother on the line above Vokiins be transcribed?  T
Title: Re: Will of Thomas Smith of Wanborough, Wilts. 1689
Post by: Bookbox on Friday 24 July 20 16:05 BST (UK)
It's written Loveng (= loving). The ascender from the k in the line below is causing interference.
Title: Re: Will of Thomas Smith of Wanborough, Wilts. 1689
Post by: toby webb on Friday 24 July 20 16:31 BST (UK)
Thank you Bookbox. With so much skill hovering, it would seem,  may I try another name?
I added 'John' from the end of the previous line
 T.
Title: Re: Will of Thomas Smith of Wanborough, Wilts. 1689
Post by: Bookbox on Friday 24 July 20 16:35 BST (UK)
Looks to me like bunce.

ADDED ... of Childery (= Childrey)
Title: Re: Will of Thomas Smith of Wanborough, Wilts. 1689
Post by: toby webb on Friday 24 July 20 16:55 BST (UK)
Bunce doesn't mean anything to me  -- yet. Childrey suddenly became obvious and being near west Challow, i feel I need to look no further.

The new attachment is confusing me. Is it in some way apologising for mis-spelling the queen's name?
It is a combination of part of the last 2 lines of the will.
Thanks, T
Title: Re: Will of Thomas Smith of Wanborough, Wilts. 1689
Post by: Bookbox on Friday 24 July 20 17:06 BST (UK)
king willim and marey Quene marey Anno Dom(ini) 1689

(I think he originally just left out the word Quene in error.)
Title: Re: Will of Thomas Smith of Wanborough, Wilts. 1689
Post by: toby webb on Friday 24 July 20 17:26 BST (UK)
Thank you Bookbox.
The final piece of the jigsaw is attached and concerns words between the red marks. Somehow it doesn't seem to make much sense - that is to me.

....John all the ......
shall be grown at my ..... in the chamber

Thanks for any help. Toby.
Title: Re: Will of Thomas Smith of Wanborough, Wilts. 1689
Post by: horselydown86 on Friday 24 July 20 17:37 BST (UK)
Bunce doesn't mean anything to me  -- yet.

You need to view the link which youngtug posted in Reply #24.

The latest transcript, bar one word:

...all the Corne and grase then

shall be grouen att my decese ^apon the to halfe ?rks^  Item I give on bedsted in the chamber...
Title: Re: Will of Thomas Smith of Wanborough, Wilts. 1689
Post by: toby webb on Friday 24 July 20 18:06 BST (UK)
Thank you for that horselydown86. I really should not have missed that.

This will is now complete thanks to you all.
I shall be back for the Smiths of Wanborough were prolific and longlived and several wrote wills.
Toby.