RootsChat.Com
Old Photographs, Recognition, Handwriting Deciphering => Handwriting Deciphering & Recognition => Topic started by: MattD30 on Sunday 26 July 20 14:40 BST (UK)
-
Hi I hope this is the right place to post this request.
Is anyone here able to help me with deciphering some parts of a will which is in Latin?
I am not looking for a complete translation/transcription but rather a list of the people named and their relationships to the testator and other people named in the will. For example if a will mention "William Short my brother in law" that is all I need, of course if he is described as being "of" a certain place it would be good to know that too.
I have managed to pick out some of the names in the will I am looking at so far so these only need confirming.
If anyone thinks they can help let me know and I'll pm you the will. It is a PCC will so the images are probably to big to post here but I'll see if I can crop them as well.
Thanks in advance
Matt
-
Matt just crop and post segments, that is what other folk do.
Sarah
-
Matt just crop and post segments, that is what other folk do.
Sarah
Hi Sarah
Yes that's what I plan to do later. I just wondered if some people might prefer to see the whole thing since it is in Latin. I wondered if it would be easier to work out the relationships that way.
Matt
-
Try posting a chunk at a time and see what happens? If people need to see a larger section they can ask, or since it’s a PCC will they can access it online, either via Ancestry or (currently) as a free download from the National Archives.
-
Hi all
I'm posting the first extract from this will [of Edward Cowper] here for people to look at. If anyone feels like doing a full translation of each bit it will help but all I really need for now is to know who the people named are, and how they are related to the testator and/or other people.
I'll post more in a separate post following this.
If anyone wants to see a bigger extract let me know.
Matt
-
Here is the next part which I have had to split into two pieces.
I hope it is easy to read.
Matt
-
Last bit for tonight.
All of these extracts should follow on from each other so they should make sense if read in order.
Matt
-
First off, it’s not a will but a Judicial Sentence, pronouncing on a dispute about proving the will of Edward Cooper of Slinfold, Sussex.
The case was brought by Robert Cooper and Judith Naldrett alias Cooper (Edward’s brother and sister) against Ralph Cooper, another brother, who was executor of Edward’s will. It was settled by the court in favour of Ralph.
There might be a will filed separately. What was the year, please?
If you want more detail, I’ll try to look at it tomorrow.
-
First off, it’s not a will but a Judicial Sentence, pronouncing on a dispute about proving the will of Edward Cooper of Slinfold, Sussex.
The case was brought by Robert Cooper and Judith Naldrett alias Cooper (Edward’s brother and sister) against Ralph Cooper, another brother, who was executor of Edward’s will. It was settled by the court in favour of Ralph.
There might be a will filed separately. What was the year, please?
If you want more detail, I’ll try to look at it tomorrow.
Hi
Thanks for the quick response. This might explain why I couldn't make sense of it and why it didn't look like the other wills I have.
I think the year is 1623. The reference on this document is PROB 11/141/294 with the last 3 numbers being the folio number [ie 294]. However on the National Archives Discovery website the only record I can find is listed as a will for Edward COOPER of Slinfold with the reference PROB 11/141/574. Maybe someone made a mistake when listing it or perhaps I've missed the will.
I'll take another look online and check to see if I've not missed the will.
Matt
-
Oops! I know what's happened here. These are the last pages of the 1623 will of Edward Cooper of Slinfold [ref PROB 11/141/574], it seem that for some reason I've deleted the first two pages from my files which probably explains why this bit made no sense.
I've downloaded the whole document again and the first part [the will] looks to be in English so I should be ok with that but I can post bits here if that helps with establishing what this part is saying.
Meanwhile anything you can tell me about this part is greatly appreciated.
Many thanks
Matt
-
Meanwhile anything you can tell me about this part is greatly appreciated.
It would be best to do the will first, as it is far more informative, and consider the Sentence afterwards.
In any case, the Sentence is mostly standard wording and will tell you hardly any more than I've already given you. I'll gladly come back to it later.
-
Meanwhile anything you can tell me about this part is greatly appreciated.
It would be best to do the will first, as it is far more informative, and consider the Sentence afterwards.
In any case, the Sentence is mostly standard wording and will tell you hardly any more than I've already given you. I'll gladly come back to it later.
Thanks for that. I've been looking through the will and most of it makes clear sense with the testator leaving money and property [in various counties] to different nephews, and other relatives.
There is one section which I think I have read correctly but I will post it here later just to double check. In it Edward leaves property "to A and after his death to B, and his heirs, and after that to C etc". I think I have read it correctly but some of the words are a bit small so it would be good to check.
I've also spotted two interesting points in the will.
Firstly there's no mention of Edward's sister Judith in the will, although both Robert and Ralph are mentioned as well as their heirs.
Secondly near the end of the will is a marginal note next to the probate. It looks like it relates to the probate as it starts "Probatum". I can see the year 1663 in it as well as the names "Robertus Cooper" [Robert Cooper] and "Radulphus Cooper" [Ralph Cooper] which must relate to his brothers. Oddly though I again cannot see Judith's name mentioned here. The writing is very small though and so I may have missed it. I will try and post this extract later so you or anyone else can see what you make of it.
Matt
-
Firstly there's no mention of Edward's sister Judith in the will, although both Robert and Ralph are mentioned as well as their heirs.
On a quick read-through, I agree that she does not appear to be mentioned in the will.
Secondly near the end of the will is a marginal note next to the probate. It looks like it relates to the probate as it starts "Probatum". I can see the year 1663 in it as well as the names "Robertus Cooper" [Robert Cooper] and "Radulphus Cooper" [Ralph Cooper] which must relate to his brothers.
A section in the body of the will sets out how the estate is to be passed down the generations. Raphe Cooper, Edward’s brother, was appointed executor on condition that he enter into a bond promising that the entail would not be broken during his lifetime. If Raphe were to default on this, Edward’s nephews, Robert Cooper and Raphe Cooper (sons of his other brother Robert), were to become the executors of Edward’s will in place of Raphe.
Probate was duly granted to Raphe Cooper as the named executor on 24 May 1623. The marginal note of 1663 then states that when Raphe died he had failed to meet the conditions set out in the will. So a second grant of probate was made on 8[?] August 1663 to Robert Cooper and Raphe Cooper (Edward’s nephews on his brother’s side), as stipulated in the will.
-
Firstly there's no mention of Edward's sister Judith in the will, although both Robert and Ralph are mentioned as well as their heirs.
On a quick read-through, I agree that she does not appear to be mentioned in the will.
Secondly near the end of the will is a marginal note next to the probate. It looks like it relates to the probate as it starts "Probatum". I can see the year 1663 in it as well as the names "Robertus Cooper" [Robert Cooper] and "Radulphus Cooper" [Ralph Cooper] which must relate to his brothers.
A section in the body of the will sets out how the estate is to be passed down the generations. Raphe Cooper, Edward’s brother, was appointed executor on condition that he enter into a bond promising that the entail would not be broken during his lifetime. If Raphe were to default on this, Edward’s nephews, Robert Cooper and Raphe Cooper (sons of his other brother Robert), were to become the executors of Edward’s will in place of Raphe.
Probate was duly granted to Raphe Cooper as the named executor on 24 May 1623. The marginal note of 1663 then states that when Raphe died he had failed to meet the conditions set out in the will. So a second grant of probate was made on 8[?] August 1663 to Robert Cooper and Raphe Cooper (Edward’s nephews on his brother’s side), as stipulated in the will.
Hi
Thanks for clarifying that note for me, I guess you've been reading through the will yourself. I am going to post a few sections either tonight or tomorrow just to check I've read them correctly.
The thing I like about this is that is very clear in how it describes the relationships of people which is helpful in putting together a tree.
I'll pop the images up soon.
Matt
-
Firstly there's no mention of Edward's sister Judith in the will, although both Robert and Ralph are mentioned as well as their heirs.
On a quick read-through, I agree that she does not appear to be mentioned in the will.
Secondly near the end of the will is a marginal note next to the probate. It looks like it relates to the probate as it starts "Probatum". I can see the year 1663 in it as well as the names "Robertus Cooper" [Robert Cooper] and "Radulphus Cooper" [Ralph Cooper] which must relate to his brothers.
A section in the body of the will sets out how the estate is to be passed down the generations. Raphe Cooper, Edward’s brother, was appointed executor on condition that he enter into a bond promising that the entail would not be broken during his lifetime. If Raphe were to default on this, Edward’s nephews, Robert Cooper and Raphe Cooper (sons of his other brother Robert), were to become the executors of Edward’s will in place of Raphe.
Probate was duly granted to Raphe Cooper as the named executor on 24 May 1623. The marginal note of 1663 then states that when Raphe died he had failed to meet the conditions set out in the will. So a second grant of probate was made on 8[?] August 1663 to Robert Cooper and Raphe Cooper (Edward’s nephews on his brother’s side), as stipulated in the will.
Hi Bookbox
Here's the section of the will which I think you were referring to in your last post. I've made what I think is a pretty close transcription of it as follows:
“I give and bequeath all the rest of my lands tenemens and hereditaments whatsoever whatsoever they be called or wheresoever lying or being within the counties of Sussex and Surrey to my brother Ralph Cooper for [the] term of his life And alfter his decease to Thomas Cooper his sonne and to the heirs male of the sayd Thomas lawfully begotten or to bee begotten and for want of issue male of the sayd Thomas to remayn to Edward Cooper second sonne of my sayd brother Ralph Cooper and to the heirs male of the sayd Edward Cooper lawfully begotten or to be begotten And for want of issue male of the sayd Edward Cooper to remayn to Robert Cooper my nephew and to the heirs male of the said Robert as aforesaid and for want of such issue male of he said Robert as aforesaid to remayne to Ralph Cooper his brother to the heirs male of the sayd Ralph and for want of issue male of the sayd Ralph as aforesaid to remayne to his brothers in like ___ Item I doe make my brother Ralph Cooper sole executor of this my last will …..”
Note words in [] have been inserted to make it easier to read.
From this I think this establishes how the land etc here should be distributed after Edward's death.
As far as I can tell this tells us that Edward bequeaths the lands etc to his brother Ralph, and then to Ralph's son Thomas and his heirs male, but if Thomas has no heirs male then they are to go to Ralph's second son Edward and his heirs male.
However if Edward has no heirs male then they are to go Robert Cooper nephew of Edward Cooper the testator and to his heirs male.
If Robert has no heirs male then they are to go Robert's brother Ralph and the heirs male of his body. If Ralph has no heirs male they are to go to his brothers.
Would that be about right in summary? It definitely helps in building up a tree for these people.
There is a word in the last line after where it says "for want of issue male of the sayd Ralph as aforesaid to remayne to his brothers in like" which I can't quite make out. Do you have any idea what that word is?
Thanks for your help and I look forward to your thoughts on this.
Matt
-
Would that be about right in summary? It definitely helps in building up a tree for these people.
Yes, I agree - a good summary. Only a few variations in the spellings. Ralph is actually written as Raphe, but it's essentially the same name. I think the nephews Robert and Raphe are the sons of Edward's other brother Robert, who appears in the Judicial Sentence.
There is a word in the last line after where it says "for want of issue male of the sayd Ralph as aforesaid to remayne to his brothers in like" which I can't quite make out.
... in like sort (= 'in the same way')
-
Would that be about right in summary? It definitely helps in building up a tree for these people.
Yes, I agree - a good summary. Only a few variations in the spellings. Ralph is actually written as Raphe, but it's essentially the same name. I think the nephews Robert and Raphe are the sons of Edward's other brother Robert, who appears in the Judicial Sentence.
There is a word in the last line after where it says "for want of issue male of the sayd Ralph as aforesaid to remayne to his brothers in like" which I can't quite make out.
... in like sort (= 'in the same way')
Hi Bookbox
Thanks. Yes sorry I did mean to write Raphe but I like you said Raphe and Ralph are essentially the same name. I think I have a will for a Ralph Cowper and there is a Ralph in my notes so I may have just mixed the name up.
I thought that last word started with an "s" but that's as far as I could make it. I had a guess at "sort" but I wasn't certain so at least you've confirmed my thoughts.
Hopefully I can get a bit further in deciphering this will now but if I get stuck again I know where to post any queries.
Many thanks for the help.
Matt