Headcorn Marriage

[toby webb]

I would be glad of some help with this marriage entry of 1680. Not helped is in Latin. Stephen & Mary seem straightforward enough but would surnames have also  been latinised. Osmer/ Osmar was the groom. Then there are other bits in latin which are beyond me. Thanks for any help. Toby

[horselydown86]

Stephanus Osmer Iuxit* in uxorem Ma=
riam Buckman, Ambo de Hedcorne

*  This verb isn't in any of the references I have to hand.  The meaning is clear enough - he took her for wife or joined her to wife.  (Probably the latter.)

Stephen Osmer [?] to wife Mary
Buckman, both of Hedcorne

Surnames weren't Latinised due to the impossibility of working out how they should be declined.

[arthurk]

Maybe duxit? (which is sort of 'he took to wife')

[horselydown86]

Yes, I'm sure that is it.

[toby webb]

'Ambo'  is clear enough now and thanks to you both but the new attached has more which I suspect may  be 'widow' et al  but would be pleased if you could confirm or otherwise the other words in this 1684 entry. Thanks, Toby.

[arthurk]

viduus - widower
vidua - widow

(The writer appears to have started 'vidua' and run out of room, then started again on the next line.)

[toby webb]

Thank you arthurk.  Would you agree about 'Alicia' being her name? Widow is news for me. The long word after nuptial is also a problem T

[arthurk]

Yes, it's Alicia (in English probably Alice) - note the form of 'c' typical of this period, looking like a small 'T'.

The same letter is at the start of the other word you asked about. The full phrase is nuptias contrahebant - they contracted marriage.

[toby webb]

Thank you arthurk. The help I get from all in this corner of RootsChat is much appreciated. Toby.