Author Topic: Domesday of Inclosures - Latin 1517  (Read 105 times)

Offline horselydown86

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,928
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Domesday of Inclosures - Latin 1517
« on: Friday 10 May 19 18:08 BST (UK) »
I would like to ask for help please in completing the translation of this entry in the Domesday of Inclosures for Buckinghamshire in 1517.

I have most of the first half (albeit with certain queries), but become lost at the section about the fee and remain lost in the material about the enclosure:

And they say that Walter Curson [by/from?] the sixth day of October in the twelfth year
of the reign of the said [recent?] King has held of Richard
Sachaverell Knight and Mary his wife the Lady hungerford
to farm let for term of years sixty acres of
[arable land and under the plow according to custom?] in Ilmer in the aforesaid county
and from the same Richard and Mary in right of the same Mary who at that time [were?]
and remain seized in [his?] [demesne?] as of fee the same day
and year those lands by hedges enclosed and
converted to the feeding of animals [? ? ? ? ?] one plow taking the livelihood of...



My particular queries concern:

1.  The date.

The inquisition was taken on 10 October 1517, so before the twelfth year of Henry VIII.

The preceding entries are two for one Edmund Brudenell.  The latter of the two gives a date in anno regni domini Regis nunc tercio - this should be 3 Henry VIII.

The earlier of the two mentions a date in anno regni predicti nuper Regis henrici [septimi] with the septimi noted as conjectural due to illegibility.

Presumably the date in Walter Curson's entry is in 12 Henry VII, but at that time Mary was married to Sir Edward Hastyngs (who died after 4 November 1506).

See:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Hungerford

Does the section about the fee make sense of this?  This section already has me confused by the apparent conflict between fuerunt (pl.) and suo (sing. & masc.).

2.  The phrase terre arrabilis et arrari consuete.

This seems to be particular to the Domesday of Inclosures.

I have taken arrari to be related to arare.  Is this - and the attempted translation above - correct?


If Walter Curson did hold Ilmer on 6 October 1496, this is my first definitive sighting of him.

The Feet of Fines has a record of Sir Edward Hastyngs and Walter Curson (plus another) purchasing land at Okeley and Brehill on 18 November 1498.

Thank you very much for your help.

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 GR2

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,819
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Domesday of Inclosures - Latin 1517
« Reply #1 on: Friday 10 May 19 19:07 BST (UK) »
 terre ..... arrari consuete = land accustomed to be ploughed

arrari is the present passive infinitive = to be ploughed

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 horselydown86

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,928
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Domesday of Inclosures - Latin 1517
« Reply #2 on: Friday 10 May 19 19:18 BST (UK) »
Many thanks GR2, much appreciated.

Offline Bookbox

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 4,982
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Domesday of Inclosures - Latin 1517
« Reply #3 on: Friday 10 May 19 20:12 BST (UK) »
Starting at unde (end of line 5), and trying to be careful with the tenses, I think the last section goes something like this ...

... where the same Richard and Mary, by the right of Mary herself, then were and still are seised in their demesne as of fee, on the same day and year he [Walter] enclosed those lands with hedges, and he converted them into pasturage for animals, and he has thus taken advantage of those [lands] whereby one ploughland is withdrawn and six people will be forced to apply elsewhere for sustenance and work. And those lands are worth 20 shillings per year.

As regards suo, it can mean his, her, its or their. It's a possessive adjective, and it's singular here because it agrees with the noun that itís qualifying (in this case, dominico), not with the person who possesses it.

As regards the date, itís the 12th year of the reign of the late/recent (nuper) aforesaid king, so I think it must be Henry VII and therefore 1496, as you say. Perhaps the reference to Mary as Lady Hungerford relates to her status at the time of writing (1517), rather than at the time Walter Curson enclosed the lands? I canít come up with a better explanation at the moment.

Offline horselydown86

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,928
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Domesday of Inclosures - Latin 1517
« Reply #4 on: Friday 10 May 19 21:13 BST (UK) »
Thank you for your careful translation Bookbox.  It's much clearer to me now; and very useful to know that Walter held land in this area as early as 1496.

In his will Sir Edward Hastyngs refers to himself as lord hastinges & hungerford, but the latter title was only in right of his wife.

The implication in the Domesday entry that Richard Sacheverell himself held the land in 1496 must arise from a lack of chronological care in the expression. I can't see another explanation.  Presumably it didn't matter enough to their purpose in making the inquiry to be scrupulous.

Your help is always greatly appreciated.