Author Topic: 1592 estate document  (Read 229 times)

Offline Davedrave

  • RootsChat Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 342
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
1592 estate document
« on: Tuesday 01 January 19 18:01 GMT (UK) »
I can read some of this but by no means all of it and would much appreciate a transcription.

Dave :)

(Extract from 1592 Survey of Market Bosworth manor, Record Office for Leics., Leicester and Rutland)

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 Bookbox

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 4,762
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: 1592 estate document
« Reply #1 on: Tuesday 01 January 19 18:42 GMT (UK) »
Wyll(ia)m Lea houldethe a ffarme
by lease for lyves and hathe three
lyves in ess[..?], that is to say his owne &
his wyfes Margeret Lea, and his
sonnes George Lea w(hi)ch farme
hathe a yard, orchard, gardyn, and
a croft adioyninge unto yt, exte-
ndinge in lengthe from Coton streete
on the southe syd, unto the com(m)on
feild on the northe: and in
breadthe from the frehold land(es) of
Mr Nowell on the est syd, unto
John Adcock(es) close ...


[right margin]
Graunted by Mr ffranc[is?]
hastinges the xvth of
Aprill 1583 Anno R[egni]
Elizab(ethe) xxvjto


ADDED - a possible dating error in the margin, because April 1583 was 25. Elizabeth (not 26.)

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.


Online arthurk

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,461
    • View Profile
Re: 1592 estate document
« Reply #2 on: Tuesday 01 January 19 19:35 GMT (UK) »
Wyll(ia)m Lea houldethe a ffarme
by lease for lyves and hathe three
lyves in ess[..?], that is to say his owne &
his wyfes Margeret Lea, and his
sonnes George Lea ...

Could the query here be in esse, which I think would fit the context?

It means 'actually in existence' as opposed to 'in posse' - potentially in existence. A lease for lives might sometimes include people as yet unborn (I think), whereas here the three people are named and obviously exist. [SEE EDIT BELOW]

If this is the case, this example predates the earliest example in the OED by 5 years, and the editors might be interested to know about it.


EDIT:
I now think I'm probably wrong about unborn people being included in a lease, in which case the contrast implied here may be between living and deceased, rather than the dictionary suggestion of actual and potential (in esse vs in posse).
Researching among others:
Bartle, Bilton, Campbell, Craven, Emmott, Harcourt, Hirst, Kellet(t), Kennedy,
Meaburn, Mennile/Meynell, Metcalf(e), Palliser, Robinson, Rutter, Shipley, Stow, Wilkinson

Census information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Offline Bookbox

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 4,762
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: 1592 estate document
« Reply #3 on: Tuesday 01 January 19 19:39 GMT (UK) »
Wyll(ia)m Lea houldethe a ffarme
by lease for lyves and hathe three
lyves in ess[..?], that is to say his owne &
his wyfes Margeret Lea, and his
sonnes George Lea ...

Could the query here be in esse, which I think would fit the context?

It means 'actually in existence' as opposed to 'in posse' - potentially in existence. A lease for lives might sometimes include people as yet unborn (I think), whereas here the three people are named and obviously exist.

If this is the case, this example predates the earliest example in the OED by 5 years, and the editors might be interested to know about it.

Good call, arthurk.

Online arthurk

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,461
    • View Profile
Re: 1592 estate document
« Reply #4 on: Tuesday 01 January 19 19:59 GMT (UK) »
If this is the case, this example predates the earliest example in the OED by 5 years, and the editors might be interested to know about it.

I've just checked, and yes, the OED welcome submissions of earlier examples than they already know about. I could do this as I have access to the site via my public library membership, but since you found the document, Dave, it would probably be better for you to do it if you can.
Researching among others:
Bartle, Bilton, Campbell, Craven, Emmott, Harcourt, Hirst, Kellet(t), Kennedy,
Meaburn, Mennile/Meynell, Metcalf(e), Palliser, Robinson, Rutter, Shipley, Stow, Wilkinson

Census information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Offline Davedrave

  • RootsChat Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 342
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: 1592 estate document
« Reply #5 on: Tuesday 01 January 19 20:00 GMT (UK) »
Many thanks Bookbox and arthurk, this sounds really interesting. I dont really know how to go about contacting OED and although I photographed the document, I can certainly claim no credit for either the transcription or its interpretation, so Id be very happy to let you do the notification and be credited for this discovery. I can certainly supply you with the LRO document ref if you wish.

Dave :)

Online arthurk

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,461
    • View Profile
Re: 1592 estate document
« Reply #6 on: Tuesday 01 January 19 20:33 GMT (UK) »
OK, I'll do it, but I will need the document reference, please.
Researching among others:
Bartle, Bilton, Campbell, Craven, Emmott, Harcourt, Hirst, Kellet(t), Kennedy,
Meaburn, Mennile/Meynell, Metcalf(e), Palliser, Robinson, Rutter, Shipley, Stow, Wilkinson

Census information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Offline Davedrave

  • RootsChat Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 342
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: 1592 estate document
« Reply #7 on: Tuesday 01 January 19 22:09 GMT (UK) »
Thank you arthurk. I think I made an error. It looks as though the date of the survey was actually 1590. The Record Office for Leicestershire, Leicester and Rutland has it as:

Market Bosworth Manor   15'30/3.1-3. Surveys & Rentals, 1558, 1588, 1590.

(It seems to be part of a collection covering a long time span but presumably this document itself is number 3 of this bit of it. Certainly 1530 is what they have as the ref for the whole collection. I hope this is OK, but if not I could pm you the link to the online catalogue page).

Dave :)

Online arthurk

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,461
    • View Profile
Re: 1592 estate document
« Reply #8 on: Wednesday 02 January 19 11:06 GMT (UK) »
Thanks, Dave - that should be sufficient, and I've found it in the catalogue.

I've now submitted the evidence to the OED, with a link to this discussion and the record office catalogue page, and we'll see what happens. However, they don't take personal details or give progress updates etc, so all you can do is go back from time to time to see if it's been accepted.

Incidentally, I now think I was wrong about unborn people being included in a lease, which might have implications for the exact nuance of the phrase. I've added a note about this to my earlier post (reply #2).
Researching among others:
Bartle, Bilton, Campbell, Craven, Emmott, Harcourt, Hirst, Kellet(t), Kennedy,
Meaburn, Mennile/Meynell, Metcalf(e), Palliser, Robinson, Rutter, Shipley, Stow, Wilkinson

Census information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk