***COMPLETED*** Help with Latin Probate please

[francis66]

Hi horsleydown86.  I have found Ralf's will for 1552 and he makes Agnes his wife, his executrix, and does leave son Thomas some things.  The probate record you've helped me with was in between other records  dated 1562 but this one seems to be undated.  There is another part to this record on the right hand side but didn't post before as it seemed a lot to ask people to translate, but if you're interested in having a look it might explain the 10 year gap between will and probate.  Many thanks for your interest

[francis66]

horsleydown86 - forgot to say, haven't managed to find a will for Thomas yet.

[horselydown86]

horsleydown86 - forgot to say, haven't managed to find a will for Thomas yet.

This is consistent with the revised reading which I gave in Reply #8.  The term ab intestato means that the person was intestate when they died.

So the 1562 grant of administration is for Thomas (who was intestate and of Goring while he lived), not Ralph.

This does however mean that the administrator isn't identified in the clip.

I've scanned through your second post.  It appears to be incomplete, in that the deceased isn't fully identified.

What can be seen is that the administration of the goods of the said deceased was to Edward Kent of Derington, who is ...avunculo d(i)c(t)e Thome... - the maternal uncle of the said Thomas*. (which Thomas appears to be the deceased).

It's possible that the interlined words in line 3 are:  ...ac ad eius usus...

This means ...and to the same uses... which may indicate that Edward Kent was a replacement administrator.

However I don't advise that you lean heavily on this latter statement.

* EDITED:

Looking again it's not clear whether this Thomas is the deceased or not.

[francis66]

Well that's all interesting mainly because I had already noticed the name Edward Kent of Derington and he is my ancestor, that was why the record interested and puzzled me!  It was all getting confusing, mainly because i couldn't read what was written but that his name was on the right hand side.  But what you have read, that he was Thomas' uncle makes sense, and I'm sure you're right that Edward was a replacement administrator.  There was also a John Kent as an overseer on Ralph's will.   Thanks for all your time and help making that record so much clearer for me.  Best wishes

[Bookbox]

Coming very late to this discussion, and I appreciate it's been marked 'Complete'.
 
I would just add that the documents may point to Thomas Saunder being a minor in 1552, when his father Ralph died. That would explain why administration of Ralph's estate was granted to Thomas' uncle Edward Kent, 'for the use of him' (eius, i.e. Thomas).

Then, when Thomas died intestate in 1562 or thereabouts (1st extract), he was perhaps still quite young, as he was described in terms of his (deceased) father Ralph.

HD has rightly pointed out that no administrator is named for Thomas' estate in 1562, nor is there any indication of an oath sworn. Is there any more of this document? You would expect at least a signature, as it includes the phrase 'I have received ...'. The last line may indicate a payment to the Treasury (Latin, thes[aurus]), but that's uncertain as it stands.

[francis66]

Hi Bookbox, thanks for taking the time to add your thoughts to my post. Can't see that there is anymore on this 1562 document, the only other Latin wording is on the Will Register at the end of  Ralph's will dated 1552 which i'll attach, maybe that might say something new.   There was no probate wording on the Original will for him.  I can see what you're saying about Thomas being a minor when Ralph died in 1552 but Ralph had nominated his wife Agnes to be executrix and can't see her mentioned anywhere, unless she died as well.   Unfortunately the Probate Diaries (where i found the 1562 document) only start in 1555, so too late for Ralph's probate record.   

[Bookbox]

the only other Latin wording is on the Will Register at the end of  Ralph's will dated 1552 which i'll attach, maybe that might say something new.

Sadly, I don't think it adds anything helpful ...

Edwardus sext(us) etc. ix^o Junij An(n)o sup(ra)d(i)cto in
eccl(es)ia p(ar)och(iali) de Su[…] cora(m) dilecto subdito meo etc.

Edward VI etc., on 9 June in the above-stated year in
the parish church of Su[…], before my beloved subject etc.

[francis66]

Ah OK, that's a shame.  i must admit when I i saw the name Edward I thought it was the uncle, but then realised it was under most of the wills around that time!  Thanks for helping though. Regards