Author Topic: Latin marriage licence 1610  (Read 452 times)

Offline goldie61

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,356
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Latin marriage licence 1610
« on: Friday 12 July 19 11:13 BST (UK) »
Iíd be grateful if someone could translate this please.

Itís a marriage licence for Robert Hanky of Whitegate and Margaret Wilkinson of Over - very close together places in Cheshire.
The next to last line seems to mention a Robert Hanke of Darnall (also very near) - and does it say Ďfatherí (pater)?

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

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 philipsearching

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,371
  • I was a beautiful baby, - what went wrong?
    • View Profile
Re: Latin marriage licence 1610
« Reply #1 on: Friday 12 July 19 13:32 BST (UK) »
I can't make out all of it (and my Latin is rusty!) but the second line refers to Robert Hankye iunior - which would fit with his father being Robert.
Please help me to help you by citing sources for information.

Census information is Crown Copyright http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

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: 2,851
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Latin marriage licence 1610
« Reply #2 on: Friday 12 July 19 13:42 BST (UK) »
Robertus Hanke de Darnall sen[ior] pater p[re]fati Roberti

Robert Hanke of Darnall senior father of the foresaid Robert.

Offline horselydown86

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,995
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Latin marriage licence 1610
« Reply #3 on: Sunday 14 July 19 07:14 BST (UK) »
I think there's a writ or brief of dispensation - br(ev)e Dispensac(i)on -  to the vicar of Over to solemnize the marriage* without banns (saving the right) - bann(i)s omiss(i)s salvo iure.

It was sworn by Robert Hanke senior the father (as in GR2's post), but it goes on to say:

...iuxta Canon p(er) iuriu(m) Burches

Which I roughly make to be:

...next (or nearby) Canon by the rights (of?) Burches

I'm not sure whether this means Robert senior is a clergyman, nor who or what is Burches?

*  This word is frustrating me - it starts with iur and has two n/v and a d in the remainder?




Offline Bookbox

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 5,102
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Latin marriage licence 1610
« Reply #4 on: Sunday 14 July 19 22:39 BST (UK) »
In case it helps to clarify, this is what I make of it ...

xijo die Maij 1610

Com(m)iss(e) fuer(unt) l(itte)re Dispensac(i)on(is) vicario de Over ad solem(n)iz(an)d(um)

m(at)r(im)oniu(m) inter Robertu(m) Hankye iunior(em) p(ar)och(ie) de

Whitegate et Margareta(m) Wilkinson p(ar)och(ie) de Over

pred(icte) spinster bannis omiss(is) salvo iure &c iurat(us) fuit

Robertus Hanke de Darnall sen(ior) pater p(re)fat(i) Roberti

iuxta Canon(em) p(er) m(agist)r(u)m Burches


12 May 1610
Letters of dispensation were granted to the Vicar of Over to solemnize a marriage between Robert Hankye the younger of the parish of Whitegate and Margaret Wilkinson of the aforesaid parish of Over, spinster, without banns, saving the right etc.; Robert Hanke the elder of Darnall, father of the aforesaid Robert, was sworn, in accordance with the Canon,* by Master Burches

   * probably a reference to canon 62 of the (recently issued) 1604 Canons, which prevented ministers from performing marriages without banns or a licence.

Offline goldie61

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,356
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Latin marriage licence 1610
« Reply #5 on: Sunday 14 July 19 22:43 BST (UK) »
Many thanks everybody for your help with this.
I was just trying to see if the name 'Burches' appeared anywhere in the family, as a name or place, - as in the post by Horselydown, without success - so many thanks for your post Bookbox clearing that up.
Lane, Burgess: Cheshire. Finney, Rogers, Gilman:Derbys
Cochran, Nicol, Paton, Bruce:Scotland. Bertolle:London
Bainbridge, Christman, Jeffs: Staffs

Offline Bookbox

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 5,102
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Latin marriage licence 1610
« Reply #6 on: Sunday 14 July 19 22:45 BST (UK) »
I think he's the church official granting the licence, sorry.

Offline goldie61

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,356
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Latin marriage licence 1610
« Reply #7 on: Sunday 14 July 19 22:46 BST (UK) »
I think he's the church official granting the licence, sorry.
No need to apologise Bookbox.
That's what I thought you meant.
My fault for not making myself clear in my post!
Lane, Burgess: Cheshire. Finney, Rogers, Gilman:Derbys
Cochran, Nicol, Paton, Bruce:Scotland. Bertolle:London
Bainbridge, Christman, Jeffs: Staffs

Offline horselydown86

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,995
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Latin marriage licence 1610
« Reply #8 on: Monday 15 July 19 04:22 BST (UK) »
I apologise for so comprehensively messing it up, goldie, especially the last part.

The coroner's inquest has shown that the deceased made his fatal misstep in interpreting the word iuxta, and was unable to arrest the subsequent slide into error.

No flowers by request.