RootsChat.Com
Old Photographs, Recognition, Handwriting Deciphering => Handwriting Deciphering & Recognition => Topic started by: GlosAncestry on Sunday 16 September 18 15:15 BST (UK)
-
Can anyone help with identifying what this document is?
The Gloucestershire Archives catalogue refers to it as a fine, but I'm not convinced it is a fine. The wording refers to it as a "concordia", I think, but does not follow the normal convention "Hec est finalis concordia" etc. Also, it's not an indenture, i.e. the top edge is straight.
The text starts with the name of the county "Glouc", which is something I've seen in court records e.g. Assizes. I am wondering if this is perhaps the final outcome of a court case in one of the Equity Courts? Or something from the local manorial court (but if so why prefix the text with the county name?).
I am struggling with transcribing the text in full, but it appears to be some kind of property transaction involving land, pasture, meadows, dovecots[?], orchards [?] etc. being sold or leased by the Harrises to John Broade of Broad Campden.
-
Can't help with the translation Glos but I recently found a U of Notts site about old documents and their purpose that you may find useful.
https://www.nottingham.ac.uk/manuscriptsandspecialcollections/researchguidance/deedsindepth/freehold/finalconcord.aspx
Venelow
Canada
-
It's almost certainly a type of conveyance very common in the Middle Ages and later, which involved a fictitious law suit known as a Fine of Lands or Final Concord. The courts were involved in the legal process and the records were kept in their archives,
Steve
-
Can anyone help with identifying what this document is?
The Gloucestershire Archives catalogue refers to it as a fine, but I'm not convinced it is a fine. The wording refers to it as a "concordia", I think, but does not follow the normal convention "Hec est finalis concordia" etc. Also, it's not an indenture, i.e. the top edge is straight.
The text starts with the name of the county "Glouc", which is something I've seen in court records e.g. Assizes. I am wondering if this is perhaps the final outcome of a court case in one of the Equity Courts? Or something from the local manorial court (but if so why prefix the text with the county name?).
I am struggling with transcribing the text in full, but it appears to be some kind of property transaction involving land, pasture, meadows, dovecots[?], orchards [?] etc. being sold or leased by the Harrises to John Broade of Broad Campden.
Hello
I thought I had come across Harris before of Broad Campden before ...
http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/0128f6ba-4e41-443c-98e7-ec31723bddd6
Bargain and sale and feoffment from John Harris of Broad Campden, Glos., yeoman, to Francis Hickes alias Haytheway of Broadway, yeoman, of three messuages and other premises called Rythams, one yardland in the Upper End, tithes and other property and common of pasture, all in Broadway.
No. 30253
[1581]
----------
Did the Archives, or does any other Archives have any accompanying surviving documents such as a 'Bargain and Sale' Conveyance and also a 'Feoffment ', indicating property was changing hands?
If you find these they will explain any property transaction taking place.
----------
My Ancestors were 'Admitted' to the Manor of Selby when they purchased a Copyhold property and are shown in the Fine Books, they attended the Manor Court and the transfer was listed in the Court Rolls. In that case there was a 'Surrender' by the owner.
Mark
-
It's a record of an agreement, made from standard fine wording.
Paraphrased, the statements in the main body are:
1. The seven Harrys acknowledge the tenements with their appurtenances to be the right of John Broade as those which John Broade has of their gift.
2. The seven Harrys remise and quitclaim the same from themselves and their heirs to John Broade and his heirs forever.
There follow identical* statements in which each of the Harrys individually grant warranty.
To take the first, John Harrys grants for himself and his heirs to John Broade and his heirs that they (JH & his heirs) will warrant to John Broade and his heirs the tenements against John Harrys and his heirs forever.
This last is a new one to me. I'm familiar with warranties given contra omnes homines (against all men). I haven't seen a warranty granted specifically against the grantors.
The final concord or agreement was the culmination of a multi-stage process in the courts.
My feeling is that this document perhaps relates to an earlier stage of the process.
By the way, the lands are:
3 messuages, one dove-cot (or pigeon house), four gardens, two orchards, 160 acres of land, 20 acres of meadow, 100 acres of pasture (or feeding), 10 acres of wood and 40 acres of furze & heath
* Based on a quickish scan. I haven't read each in full.
-
The Latin in your document is very similar to the examples here (in particular the second example):
http://www.rootschat.com/links/01mqg/
Obviously plurals etc will differ.
-
Many thanks to everyone who has responded, especially horselydown86 for his/her insight and translation. I had managed to work out the property in question, but was (am?) unsure exactly what was happening here.
Yes, I agree this does seem to be a variant of a standard fine.
Questions (apologies if these are naive/uninformed)...
1. As I understand it, a fine was a fictitious court case that was used as means of transferring the land from one party to another. This seems to be slightly different. Do we think this is part of a genuine court case, or part of the standard fine process?
2. To put things rather simplistically, are the 7 Harrys selling the land to Broade? Or are they acknowledging him as a tenant of land they hold? Should this be interpreted in the context of manorial land holding somehow?
3. What might giving a warranty against yourself mean?! Does that clause suggest there had been some genuine grievance that had been taken to court perhaps?
Thanks
-
Further questions...
4. So far as I can see the document is undated? Am I right?
5. So far as I can see there is no indication of the nature of the relationship between the various Harryses? Correct? I think it is likely John is the father and the others his sons, but I don't think this confirms that directly in any way?
Thanks
-
Hello GlosAncestry
Comments are NOT a Legal Opinion
The fine was not usually fictitious and might sometimes be based on a valuation of the property, or an arbitrary amount, or some other amount, when a property changed hands according to the Customs of the Manor, or that Land or Property in question.
I am attaching a more recent snippet of the List of Admissions in the Several Copyhold Courts of another Manor, where a Copyhold property was changing hands and apparently it was also the Custom of that Manor to be Admitted as a Customary Tenant and a Fee was paid to be Admitted, the Fee procedure confirmed in the front inside cover.
In the attached snippet a Fine of £55 was also stated, but I am unsure who received the Fine in this case, as it just says Cp.
Some paid Fine amounts, but some right hand columns are blank for some reason. There was also a separate Fines Book and the whole process was entered in the Manor Court Rolls of the Copyhold Court in these particular cases.
It seems my family were exempt (no figure R/H column), the property was just over 5 acres, but they were Admitted as Customary Tenants and gave Service to the Lord's Court (served on the Manorial Court as Jurors).
A Copyhold Property was transferred to my family, who also took over the Mortgage debt of a relation, who had become a Widow and she was probably unable to pay a large Mortgage her late husband had left her with.
----------
You will need to research the land in question and if it is mentioned in the Court Rolls and Court Books (if they have survived), also the relevant Manor or Land and its Customs.
Some Manors may be divided up into "Moieties" and owned by more than one Lord (Family).
-----------
Broad Campden
Although some Manors had more than one Lord, there is a definite listing for Broad Campden, Gloucestershire, so that would be a starting point, for research.
Summary report on estate and family papers 12th-20th century of the NOEL FAMILY, EARLS OF GAINSBOROUGH
See here for full Summary Listing
https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/nra/lists/GB-0056-DE_3214.htm
Deeds 15th-20th century (1 medieval) as follows: Chipping Campden (not numerous) 15th-20th century, Berrington 16th-19th century, Westington 17th-19th century, Broad Campden 16th-18th century, Charingworth 16th-18th century, Foxcote 1508, Weston-under-Edge 17th century, Clowerwall 1757, Blockley and Draycott (Worcs) 16th-18th century.
Campden estate
Chipping Campden, Broad Campden, Berrington and Westington leases 17th-18th century (listed with deeds).
Maps and plans 18th-19th century, including manor of Campden 1722, Charingworth c1799, Broad Campden post 1815 and Chipping Campden gardens 1830s.
Chipping Campden court roll 1555; Campden and Berrington court books 1544-67.
The family held land in many Counties (besides the above) and the documents may be spread over several Record Offices, if they have survived.
Mark
-
I will attempt to answer your questions to the best of my limited understanding.
1. It's going too far to say that the cases which resulted in fines were fictitious. They were real cases processed in the real courts before real justices.
The difference is that both parties colluded willingly in the process, and everyone involved (including the justices) would have known all along exactly how the matter would end up.
I have recently transcribed documents from around 1505 relating to a fine involving my ancester.
In this case a number of the intermediate deeds and writs survived with the fine. They are all very real.
2. The land is being transferred from the 7 Harrys to John Broade.
As far as I know, the only clue this document provides* to the nature of the transfer (regarding sale/lease) is that they remise and quitclaim from themselves forever. So it probably isn't a lease, because the owner would retain a reversionary interest in leased land.
This doesn't have to do with the copyhold relationship between a manorial tenant and the lord of the manor.
However, if a manor were conveyed from one lord to another by fine, I'm sure the manor court rolls would acknowledge the transfer.
3. I'm not sure what is signified by the warranty against the grantor. In a basic sense the warranty should cover the grantor, but why it is stated explicitly here instead of as part of the contra omnes homines isn't clear.
My instinct is that this is just process, rather than a reflection of previous trouble, but who knows?
4. Correct. Sometimes the date and other brief notes are on the back.
5. Correct, unless I am badly mistaken.
* However I would like to know more about the meaning of the words between Egidio Harrys and de tribus on the top line. There may be a clue in this section, which I can't fully transcribe.
-
Hi
Out of my depth with Latin but for, tribuarius, a, um, adj. [tribus], of or belonging to a tribe or tribes ...
Perhaps belonging to more than one person?
Does that make any sense?
Mark
Added: tribulis, is, m. [tribus], one of the same tribe with another. ...
-
Thanks Mark. That word is tribus, which just means 3. It refers to the number of messuages.
The words I would like to understand are either side of Joh(ann)i Broade.
...q(uo)d iuste &c [ten(?)] Joh(ann)i Broade [Con(?)]...
-
Hello
In the document for the Medieval Stockingford Grange, Stockingford (now Galley Common) and in the Nuneaton and Stockingford Court's Baron and Court Rolls there are some abbreviations for Tenement.
Could Ten' be short for Tenement?
Mark
-
The words I would like to understand are either side of Joh(ann)i Broade.
...q(uo)d iuste &c [ten(?)] Joh(ann)i Broade [Con(?)]...
... q(uo)d iuste (et sine dilatione) ten(eant) Joh(ann)i Broade con(ventionem inter eos factam) de tribus ...
... that in accordance with the law, and without delay, they should hold to an agreement with John Broade made amongst themselves concerning three ...
-
2. The land is being transferred from the 7 Harrys to John Broade.
I think the property has already been transferred as a gift from the Harrys family to John Broade --
line 5 Joh(ann)es Broade h(ab)et de dono... (= John Broade holds as a gift ...)
The Harrys are now agreeing to recognise (individually) that Broade is the rightful owner and to undertake not to interfere with his rights of possession.
This doesn't have to do with the copyhold relationship between a manorial tenant and the lord of the manor.
Agreed. I can't see any indication that this is a manorial document.
-
... q(uo)d iuste (et sine dilatione) ten(eant) Joh(ann)i Broade con(ventionem inter eos factam) de tribus ...
... that in accordance with the law, and without delay, they should hold to an agreement with John Broade made amongst themselves concerning three ...
Many thanks for the translation, Bookbox. It's no wonder I couldn't work it out.
Another one to add to my little library of standard legal Latin.