William Bonsall of Hartington 1602

[Designer Jeans]

This is a very big ask - please can anyone help with a document written in latin relating to the affairs of William Bonsall of Hartington, lunatic with lucid intervals 1601-1602.  If not the whole thing, the general gist and names would be most helpful.  (Only able to post the first third due to size constraints possibly more to follow).  Thank you

[Watson]

He is described as:

" ...Will[elmu]s Bonsall yoman lunaticus dicunt lucidis gaude[ns] intervallis ..."

William Bonsall, yeoman, a lunatic who they say enjoys lucid intervals ...

[horselydown86]

I believe it is a royal writ of Queen Elizabeth requesting that five men (or a subset of them) establish an inquiry into the lunacy of William Bonsall.

The men named are:

John Bullocke Esquire, also said to be: ...ffeodari Com' n(ost)ri Darb'... (see below)
Francis Fitzherbert Esquire
Edward Berisforde Esquire, also(?) Escheator of the aforesaid County
Laurence Wright Esquire
Nicholas Alexander Gentleman

The key part is:

...ad inquirend(um) p(er) sacr(u)m p(ro)bor(um) & leg(alium)

ho(m)i(nu)m de p(re)d(i)c(t)o Com' n(ost)ro Darb' tam infra lib(er)tates q(ua)m ext(ra) p(er) quos rei v(er)itas melius sciri pot(er)it utrum Will(elmu)s Bonsall yoman lunaticus sit aut lucidis [gaude(t)?/gaude(at)? - incomplete at end of the line]

int(er)vallis...


That is, they are:

...to inquire by the oath of good and lawful

men of our aforesaid County of Derby, both within the liberties and without, by whom the truth of the matter may be better known, whether William Bonsall yeoman is a lunatic or enjoys lucid

intervals...


You might find useful background to the nature of this inquiry in a transcript by Westcott of an indented inquisition which I think is given in reply to a similar writ.

See:  https://latindiscussion.org/threads/inquisition-of-lunacy-dated-1697-part-ii.19357/

The last line of your clip also mentions manors and messuages, goods and chattells and lands and tenements.

********

It appears that John Bullocke may be the Feodary for Derbyshire.  See:

https://thelawdictionary.org/feodary/

ADDED:

Looking again, I think that as sit is subjunctive the second verb should be also, meaning it's likely to be gaude(at).

Therefore, the transcript of this part might more accurately become:

...whether William Bonsall yeoman should be a lunatic or should enjoy lucid intervals...

Edited following Watson's Reply #3.

[Watson]

Thank you, horselydown86.  I am sure your transcript of the bit about the lucid intervals is correct:

" ... utrum Will(elmu)s Bonsall yoman lunaticus sit aut lucidis gaudeat intervallis ..."

The two clauses are indirect questions, which routinely take the subjunctive, so I think they should be translated as:

"whether William Bonsall, yeoman, is a lunatic or enjoys lucid intervals ..."

[horselydown86]

Thanks Watson.

I found some instruction online about indirect questions in Latin, which suggested that the subjunctive case there is more about indicating the grammatical organisation than about dictating the translation.

So to the extent that I understood it, I agree with your suggested translation in Reply #3.

[Designer Jeans]

Thank you Watson and horselydown.  I am in awe of your expertise and generosity.  With your help I am beginning to make sense of things.  The Westcott info is particularly helpful and I am grateful to you for directing me to this.  It would be nice to have a little more if at all possible, especially the bit relating to Alice, William's wife.  Sincere thanks.

[horselydown86]

DJ, no Alice is mentioned in this second clip.  I think the misdirection has come from either aliqua or aliena' (used twice in different forms) in the top two lines.

It starts with:

...Et si idem Will(elmu)s in eodem statu existens terr(as) aut ten(ementa) aliqua alienav(it) necne et si sic quas terr(as) et que ten(ementa)...

...And if the same William existing in the same state alienated any lands or tenements or not and if so which lands and which tenements...

It goes on with more questions about to whom, where, when and in what manner such lands were alienated; and then on to what lands remain to William etc etc.

I can't see any personal information in the rest of this clip.

Speaking generally, we wouldn't expect to find personal information in this writ.  Whatever is to be found is more likely to be in the response.

[Watson]

I believe the writ is known as a writ de lunatico inquirendo.  Some time ago, I studied a case in 1830.  Following such a writ, a lunacy commission was set up and the victim in that instance was, in effect, put on trial for his sanity.  He was a wealthy landowner.  He lost and spent the rest of his days in an asylum.  The system appears not to have changed much between Elizabethan times and 1830.

[Designer Jeans]

Fantastic, thank you both again for the additional information.  I have a second page from NA which I assume is the response and in which I can read a number of names, including Alice.  There are further documents listed on NA in Jan 1602 where Humphrey Goodwyn is acting as William's attorney and his lands etc are being sold.  Then another document dated 1608 indicating perjury.  Exciting stuff!  Your help is very much appreciated.