Extracts from the Will of Thomas Seales of Wye

[horselydown86]

The first line of Extract 3 may be:

To Gregory Dryland 5 & youngest 5...

Paraphrase:  To Gregory Dryland's 5 children and the youngest 5 children of...

[Maiden Stone]

I'm pleased I was right about "noysom". I was puzzled by "noysom wages". Now it makes sense.
Is it definitely "silver cup" in extract 1?
What's date of will?

[bearkat]

There is a Goat Lees Lane in Boughton Aluph.

There's a primary school in Kennington called Goat Lees.

[MattD30]

I'm pleased I was right about "noysom". I was puzzled by "noysom wages". Now it makes sense.
Is it definitely "silver cup" in extract 1?
What's date of will?

Hi

The Will is dated 7 April 1567 and the Probate was on 5 April 1568.

[MattD30]

I'm hoping someone can double check my reading of the following sections of the Will. I am attaching the two parts separately due to the file size. The following is a transcription of my reading of the first part:

"To Thomas Dryland the 3rd s of John & Rose
Marsh land at Romney Marsh called _______ in occup of Thomas Beane
Xstopr [Christopher] Dryland 4th son of John & Rose
____ called _______ in Wye or Brooke
in occup of Geo Young
To Gregory Dryland 5th youngest s
of John & Rose lands at Boughton
commonly called Goteleyse and
5 acres wood sometyme Barryes
+ my tent: + garden Jervase Bourke
doth occupy and 12 acres at Burmash
+ 3 acres in ___ parish ____ ___ ___ St
John's College, Cambridge, 10 acres at Dymchurch
+ 2 acres at Pyms[?] called Somers"

I've indicated any words I'm not sure of with a [?] and any words which I haven't been able to make out are marked with _____

Thanks in advance for any ideas.

Matt

[shanreagh]

third line from bottom

parish adjg land xxx

'Adjg' is short for 'adjoining'

'+ my tent: + garden'

Should read
.& my ten(emen)t: & garden...(per HorselyDown86)

[MattD30]

Here is the last part of the Will.

"continuation of T Searles Will"

"Cozen Wm Halfeild/Hadfeild tent + garden
in Wye in occup of John Tyterden
+ lane in Broomfielde"

"To Tho Steansham + Elizabeth Steansham
my land at Neckwolde in the occup
of John Dodd"

"Witnesses
Wm Payne
Isaac B______
Wm Prowde"

The surname Steansham might also be Stransham/Strensham [or a variation]. I also have a copy of the 1559 Will of John Dryland of Faversham in which he mentions "Elizabeth Strensham my dau" and also "Thomas Stransham" who he calls his "son in lawe". Given that both Wills mention a lot of the same people including Thomas "Stransham", I suspect that he two families are connected.

John Dryland's daughter Elizabeth married Thomas "Stransham".

In his 1567 Will Thomas Searles mentions "John Dryland and Rose my late dau" and also refers to "my father Serles" so I suspect that Rose Searles was married to John Dryland [who died in 1559]. What does everyone else think?

I'll see if I can get copies of the Registered copies of these Wills as they may be clearer than the notes on Ancestry,

Matt

[MattD30]

third line from bottom

parish adjg land xxx

'Adjg' is short for 'adjoining'

'+ my tent: + garden'

Should read
.& my ten(emen)t: & garden...(per HorselyDown86)

Thanks for clarifying what the word starting with "A" was. I did think it might be an abbreviation of adjoinging but wasn't sure.

Matt

[shanreagh]

I am a little uncertain about what we are doing here.  This seems to be a contemporary, meaning circa 1950s on ??, note from a 16th century document. 

Unless you are certain that the notes are faithfully recording what is there then I would not reproduce these  notes as they are. Perhaps first transcribe as they are but for research purposes  I would fill out the abbreviations.  Some of the abbreviations would be what I would use eg 'adjg'  and if I was 'translating' this handwriting I would be  putting these in full. We do not want future researchers believing that 'adjg' was found in the original if the original did not show this.

I am  not sure that a legal document from 16th century would have this.  Similarly with tent: Unless I could be assured that this was how the original document had it then I would be writing tenement etc. 

Hopefully you will be able to check the actual document. Sometimes even these were a clerkly transcription of the original (there being no other way of making a copy) so unless it had the actual signatures then it could be classed as a secondary source and this handwritten paper a secondary source  from a secondary source then the translation of the notes a secondary source from a........

My view is that the notes we are looking at now  are a useful finding aid for further research.   I would be marking it clearly that is not an original source.