Author Topic: Interpreting 1719 sasine  (Read 399 times)

Offline rjknott

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,166
    • View Profile
Interpreting 1719 sasine
« on: Wednesday 22 July 20 15:51 BST (UK) »
Later wills suggest that John Gaff inherited/bought/was given land by the Duke of Hamilton in 1719.
I have now bought the 1719 sasine (attached) and I am clearly missing something as the land appears to have been inherited from his recently dead father, James Gaff, and I don't really understand the involvement of the Duke of Hamilton.

The sasine is not particularly easy to read, but is not too bad. I assume this is some sort of land dispute but I would be grateful for a better interpretation.

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

Census: Crown Copyright www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Online Forfarian

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 11,265
  • Never trust anything you find online .....
    • View Profile
Re: Interpreting 1719 sasine
« Reply #1 on: Wednesday 22 July 20 16:11 BST (UK) »
Sorry, the copy is too small for me to to read without being blown up and too fuzzy to read when it has been blown up.

However I imagine that the involvement of the Duke of Hamilton has to do with him being the feudal superior of the land in question.
Researching

AITKENHEAD, Lanarkshire; BINNY, Forfar; BLACK, New Monkland; BRYSON, Cumbernauld; BURGESS, North-East Scotland; CRUICKSHANK, Rothes; DALLAS, Botriphnie; DAVIDSON, Oyne; GUTHRIE, Angus; HOGG, Larbert; LESLIE, Rothes/Mortlach; MENDUM, England; MOLLISON, Lethnot; PATERSON, Larbert; RHIND, Forfar; SANG, Scotland; SCOTT, East Kilbride; STOR(R)I/E/Y, Shotts; THORNTON, Shotts; WADDELL, New Monkland; WILKIE, New Monkland; WILKIE, Tannadice; WYLLIE, Angus; YOUNG, Keith

Offline rjknott

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,166
    • View Profile
Re: Interpreting 1719 sasine
« Reply #2 on: Wednesday 22 July 20 16:41 BST (UK) »
Thanks for your reply - I suspect you are right.

I've split the main section to see whether that works better.
I had tested the previous attachments, but clearly not very well: 500kB isn't very much.

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 Falkyrn

  • RootsChat Honorary
  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 8,268
  • Cuimhnichibh air na daoine bho'n d'thainig sibh
    • View Profile
Re: Interpreting 1719 sasine
« Reply #3 on: Wednesday 22 July 20 16:58 BST (UK) »
It was possibly not a land dispute but proof being provided as to the right of inheritance as title to land was not generally passed on through a Will/Testament until the latter part of the 19th Century

Retours of heirs -
Quote
Whenever a vassal died, his heir had to prove his right to inherit. In the case of a subject superior, a jury of local landowners was assembled to hear evidence and to decide whether a particular individual was the rightful heir.-

Offline GR2

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,132
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Interpreting 1719 sasine
« Reply #4 on: Wednesday 22 July 20 20:01 BST (UK) »
This sasine contains a precept of clare constat, i.e. a document whereby the feudal superior states that it is clear to him that someone is the rightful heir to a deceased vassal who held land from him. If James Gaff had passed the proprty on to his son in his own lifetime, this wouldn't be needed, just an ordinary sasine.

The Duke of Hamilton is the feudal superior, but appears to be underage, as, with the consent of his curators, he established a commission to check the documentation proving John was James's heir.

"It clearly apeareth and is known That the Deceast James Gaff Flesher In Redding Father of John Gaff bearer hereof dyed last vest and seased as of fie at the faith and peace of her Majestie Queen Ann In all and heall ane oxengate of land of the lands of Redding lying on the north side of the town of the same ....."

In other words, when he died, James possessed the fee of the lands, was not in a state of rebellion against the crown, and was the father of John, his heir. The rest of the document describes the lands and lists the rent in money and kind (e.g. capons at Easter) and the services, including thirlage (having to have any corn grown ground at a certain mill).

N.B. James Gaff died before 1st August 1714, as that's the day of Queen Anne's death.

Offline rjknott

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,166
    • View Profile
Re: Interpreting 1719 sasine
« Reply #5 on: Thursday 23 July 20 08:38 BST (UK) »
Thanks very much: that all makes good sense even if a less interesting story, perhaps, than the Duke giving his favourite butcher some land!
The duke was indeed underage: he was born in 1703 and inherited the title in 1712.
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 rjknott

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,166
    • View Profile
Re: Interpreting 1719 sasine
« Reply #6 on: Thursday 23 July 20 10:13 BST (UK) »
Just to add that the 1855 will of a descendant does include the phrase 'clare constat' when it talks about the 1719 document.

I'm somewhat confused by dates as I have a will/inventory for James Gaff dated 1723. Could this be for the James who died pre-1714? if not there seems an unlikely flurry of deaths between c1714 and 1723?

I have John Gaff (1663-1741) s James Gaff (dc1714 or 1723) with John Gaff owning the land in 1719.

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 GR2

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,132
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Interpreting 1719 sasine
« Reply #7 on: Thursday 23 July 20 10:48 BST (UK) »
That "will" is in fact a testament dative. A testament testamentar contains a latterwill whereby a person decides what to do with his property, appoints executors etc. A testament dative is a document where a person has died intestate  and the commissary has confirmed a person as executor and allows him to deal with the estate. Testaments dative are often made several years after a person's death.

Have you been able to read all of it? It says John was appointed executor dative as next of kin and lists items of household goods to the value of 64 14/8d Scots, the most expensive being a copper cauldron worth 40. Unfortunately (and this is quite common) it doesn't give a date for the death of either James Gaff or Elspet Davie. For James it says he died "Jajvijc and --------- years" Jajvijc is 1700, but there is a blank where there would have been the rest of the year, e.g. Jajvijc and ten years.

Offline rjknott

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,166
    • View Profile
Re: Interpreting 1719 sasine
« Reply #8 on: Thursday 23 July 20 11:09 BST (UK) »
Thanks again for your help. I thought I had read all the document but, until you explained, had assumed that the date of James' death was just blank. I think I can now assume that this does refer to the James who died pre 1714 which is good.

Not for the first time it is quite difficult to place these people in the right social category. Wills and death certificates often describe someone as a roadman, butcher, carpenter etc and then they have several properties.

This John Gaff did go on to help set up the first church in Polmont, so I assume he was a fairly prosperous butcher.

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

Census: Crown Copyright www.nationalarchives.gov.uk