Author Topic: 1642 will  (Read 430 times)

Offline Richard Knott

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,226
    • View Profile
1642 will
« on: Sunday 17 February 19 18:45 GMT (UK) »
Can some one please fill in the gaps and amend any errors:

Memorandum that James Starr late of Walton
uppon Thames in the County of Surrey did about a
day or two before his death being very sick
utter(?) his mind as follows viz(?) he gave ??
Twenty Pound of same(?) to him as Administrator
of the goods Elizabeth Heath ?? were ?? administred
by Joane Starr late wife of the said James Starr
?? unto William Starr his sonne intending
hereby as the witnesses ?? ?? paid
William Starr his sonne should be his ex(ecu)tor
witness hereunto William King & Gawen Mills

Thanks.
Richard
All the families I am researching are listed on the main page here:
www.64regencyancestors.com

Census: Crown Copyright www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Offline goldie61

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 4,509
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: 1642 will
« Reply #1 on: Sunday 17 February 19 20:20 GMT (UK) »
Memorandum that James Starr late of Walton
uppon Thames in the County of Surry did about a
day or two before his death being very sick
utter his mind as followeth vizt he gave the
Twenty Pound yt came to him as Administrator
of the goods Elizabeth Heath w(hi)ch were unadministred
by Joane Starr late wife of the said James Starr
dec(ease)d unto William Starr his sonne intending
thereby as the witnesses p(re)sent concerned the said
James S William Starr his sonne should be his ex(ecu)tor
Witnes hereunto William King & Gowen Mills


yt = that
‘present’ - you often get ‘p’ with, or without, a squiggle after it, to stand for ‘pre’, or ‘per’, or ‘pro’.
vizt = ‘videlicet’ = ’that is to say’

If you put  commas between ‘being very sick’, it makes more sense.

‘concerned’ - I think it’s this.


Lane, Burgess: Cheshire. Finney, Rogers, Gilman:Derbys
Cochran, Nicol, Paton, Bruce:Scotland. Bertolle:London
Bainbridge, Christman, Jeffs: Staffs

Offline Richard Knott

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,226
    • View Profile
Re: 1642 will
« Reply #2 on: Sunday 17 February 19 21:09 GMT (UK) »
Thanks.
R
All the families I am researching are listed on the main page here:
www.64regencyancestors.com

Census: Crown Copyright www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Offline horselydown86

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,437
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: 1642 will
« Reply #3 on: Monday 18 February 19 05:19 GMT (UK) »
‘concerned’ - I think it’s this.

It's:  Conceived

Took quite a bit of staring to figure it out.

ADDED:

Regarding the character seen on the same line in ?ere by and ?e said:

Normally I would read this as an h.  However, I can see why goldie has read it as th.

To complicate matters, he uses two different hs (eg here unto and his) and a regular th (eg the in line 4).

So bear in mind that the third last line could be read thus:

...here by as ye witnesses p(re)sent Conceived he said...




Offline Richard Knott

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,226
    • View Profile
Re: 1642 will
« Reply #4 on: Monday 18 February 19 07:54 GMT (UK) »
Thanks for the clarification.
R
All the families I am researching are listed on the main page here:
www.64regencyancestors.com

Census: Crown Copyright www.nationalarchives.gov.uk