Help with a 1628 will

[Bookbox]

Maybe just worth completing the last line ...

&c ad S(an)cta ^&c^ vigore Com(m)issionis in ea parte al(ia)s emanate iurate

etc., sworn on the Holy etc. [Gospels of God] by power of commission issued in that respect elsewhere

... which shows that the widow did not have to trouble to attend the probate court to swear the oath, but did so ‘by commission’.

[londonscorpion]

Many thanks, BB, for that addition and interpretation.

Would the executrix have had to be of some social standing to be offered such a privilage, or just too old/ill to attend?

[londonscorpion]

One other small point: the will was definately drawn up in December 1628, so I would imagine the earliest probate could have been granted was in 1629. I presume also that the "oct" in octavo means "8" so is there a mistake in the probate latin text?

[JenB]

No, 1628 is correct, because at that time the year didn’t change until Lady Day, 25 March (Julian calendar) This was the case until the Gregorian calendar was adopted in 1752.

[londonscorpion]

Riiight !!! So, a little bit of double dating to do!

Thanks for the reminder.

[Bookbox]

Would the executrix have had to be of some social standing to be offered such a privilage, or just too old/ill to attend?

Neither. As far as I know, for the sake of convenience anyone could (and indeed still can) swear a probate oath by commission, on payment of the appropriate fee to an authorised commissioner for oaths.

[JenB]

Riiight !!! So, a little bit of double dating to do!

Thanks for the reminder.

Sometimes January/February/March dates were expressed as (say) 1628/9, which is useful as a gentle reminder!

[londonscorpion]

As a matter of interest does anyone one know how do the major search sites (ANC, FindMyPast and FS) deal with the Julien/Gregorian issue. I cannot recall ever having seen an instance of double dating on any of their transcriptions?