Author Topic: Will 1751 of William Batchelor  (Read 358 times)

Offline Bookbox

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 4,684
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Will 1751 of William Batchelor
« Reply #18 on: Monday 19 November 18 17:45 GMT (UK) »
Page 4 snippet 2

36.   ffifty one Will Batchelor Signed Sealed published and declared by the within named William

37.    Batchelor the Elder the Testator as and for his last Will and Testament in the presence of us who Subscribed our names

38.    as Witnesses thereto in his presence   Ri. Alchorne   Nichs Rankin    Nic. Gilbert.

(Say if I've missed anything. Duplicate postings, some trimmed some not, are a bit confusing.)

RootsChat is the busiest, largest free family history forum site in the country. It is completely free to use. Register now.
Also register instantly with Facebook or Twitter (and other social networks). Start your genealogy search now.


Offline londonscorpion

  • RootsChat Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 293
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Will 1751 of William Batchelor
« Reply #19 on: Monday 19 November 18 21:37 GMT (UK) »
Thanks Bookbox, and for the auto correct tip - will go through again and fix the capitalisation.

On page 3 line 22 is it not furnitures in the plural?
Clark, Clarke, Batchelor, Diamond, Ruddick,
Yorkshire: Oaks, Denton, Sykes

RootsChat is the busiest, largest free family history forum site in the country. It is completely free to use. Register now.
Also register instantly with Facebook or Twitter (and other social networks). Start your genealogy search now.


Offline londonscorpion

  • RootsChat Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 293
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Will 1751 of William Batchelor
« Reply #20 on: Monday 19 November 18 21:41 GMT (UK) »
On page 2 line 17, I am struggling to imagine what Members might be referring to; I must admit I still read this as Windows.
Clark, Clarke, Batchelor, Diamond, Ruddick,
Yorkshire: Oaks, Denton, Sykes

Offline Bookbox

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 4,684
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Will 1751 of William Batchelor
« Reply #21 on: Monday 19 November 18 22:37 GMT (UK) »
On page 3 line 22 is it not furnitures in the plural?

I read it as ffurniture. The last mark on the line is just a 'filler', also seen at the ends of other lines.

I am struggling to imagine what Members might be referring to

I believe it just means the constituent parts that belong to it, similar to 'appurtenances'.

I must admit I still read this as Windows

If you look at Page 2 line 52, which has both Malthouse and Warehouse together, you can see the difference between the capital M and the capital W. In the extract below, everything to the left of the vertical line belongs to the M. Once you have this in mind, I think the -embers is clear, using two different kinds of e.

Offline londonscorpion

  • RootsChat Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 293
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Will 1751 of William Batchelor
« Reply #22 on: Tuesday 20 November 18 09:20 GMT (UK) »
You have that one BookBox. Thanks, but I need to send you a PM
Clark, Clarke, Batchelor, Diamond, Ruddick,
Yorkshire: Oaks, Denton, Sykes

Offline Bookbox

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 4,684
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Will 1751 of William Batchelor
« Reply #23 on: Tuesday 20 November 18 19:13 GMT (UK) »
‘Rights, members and appurtenances’ is a commonly found phrase in property documents, particularly in relation to manorial land.

Oxford English Dictionary
member, n. and adj.
II.5.a. A section or district, esp. an outlying part of an estate, manor, parish, etc. Now rare.
(with references from 1485 to 1891)

Offline londonscorpion

  • RootsChat Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 293
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Will 1751 of William Batchelor
« Reply #24 on: Tuesday 20 November 18 21:34 GMT (UK) »
BB, Thanks for that.

One more thing to clarify: on page 2a we have a Nicholas Bankin, and on page 4a Nicholas Rankin as witness. I would imagine this could have been the same person or at least the same family. Can we decide whether it is an R or a B.
Clark, Clarke, Batchelor, Diamond, Ruddick,
Yorkshire: Oaks, Denton, Sykes

Offline Bookbox

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 4,684
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Will 1751 of William Batchelor
« Reply #25 on: Tuesday 20 November 18 21:58 GMT (UK) »
on page 2a we have a Nicholas Bankin, and on page 4a Nicholas Rankin as witness. I would imagine this could have been the same person or at least the same family. Can we decide whether it is an R or a B.

The first instance (p. 2) is referred to in reply #13 above. Like Horselydown, I think it is unclear, but because the letter curls back on itself it looks to me more like B than R.

In the second instance (the witness on p. 4), the letter curls slightly forwards, definitely not backwards, and therefore looks more like R. It's also closer in shape to other known Rs in the document.

Sometimes these things are not clearcut. You have to remember that register wills are copies. The original itself may have been unclear, and/or the clerk may have misread it. Until you can confirm the name from elsewhere it would probably be wise to incorporate both possible names in your research.

On further review of the witnesses’ names, I now think the last one is Ric. Gilbert (not Nic., as previously suggested).

Offline horselydown86

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,684
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Will 1751 of William Batchelor
« Reply #26 on: Wednesday 21 November 18 04:55 GMT (UK) »
One more thing to clarify: on page 2a we have a Nicholas Bankin, and on page 4a Nicholas Rankin as witness. I would imagine this could have been the same person or at least the same family. Can we decide whether it is an R or a B.

Initially I went with Rankin, based on the difference in formation of the capital letter compared to other capital Bs.  See the second, lower, loop at the left of the letter, on his B (eg Buildings & Batchelor), not found on the name's capital.  This was despite the backwards loop of the lower right-hand section of the name's capital.

However, having now found capital Rs in the full will, it's also quite different to those (see Read, Roberts, Reign & Rates).

I now think he must have intended to write Bankin at the time he wrote the first name (based on what he saw in the original text).

But I also see the witness name as Rankin.

As Bookbox has said, it can't be resolved perfectly.