Chaplins of Tathwell Hall

[Little Nell]

Dame Elizabeth Chaplin who married Charles Gregory is strictly speaking given the wrong title - she should have been Lady.

However, as I said before in times past, it was not as fixed as it is now.  I have the widow of a knight who died in the 16th century who was referred to as Dame Elizabeth - strictly speaking she was Lady.  Another in the mid 17th century, also referred to as Dame.  Perhaps it comes from the custom of listing them in the will calendars in Latin?  Dominus for the knight, title Sir and Domina for the knight's wife, interpreted as Dame, (instead of Lady) which is probably a contraction of Domina.  Some clerks grasp of Latin was better than others.

Nell

[Ili1133]

I think Brigidmac was looking at a second Will in Latin contained in PROB11/641 (the Will in English Nell refers to is in PROB11/640). It mentions John’s sisters but I have only glanced at it. There must be some reason for the two documents and maybe this has a connection to the later writ. My legal understanding (and legal Latin) is not good enough to give a reliable interpretation I’m afraid.

[brigidmac]

could lady Ann have inherited the title Dame from her mother ?@  Not relevant now as this is wrong person

i posted a general topic about nobility + titles on the common room forum
Am gradually getting an understanding of these terms

the will i wanted to have an idea about was for young john johannis Chaplin d 1730

its quite short but in latin really hard to decipher any names ..if he left everything to his wife
+didnt mention his sisters at all

[Ili1133]

I have had a further look at the document in Latin. It’s some sort of legal pronouncement on John’s will delivered by John Bettesworth, Dean and Master of the Prerogative Court of Canterbury. It mentions Elizabeth, young John’s wife (Domina Elizabetha Chaplin), who is a minor, with John Morris (her father?) acting as her guardian. It also mentions young John’s three sisters.

I’m afraid my Latin isn’t up to the details of what the Court is specifying should happen. This may be the probate, but as it’s separate from the Will and quite lengthy perhaps it has a different function. You would need to post a link so someone with a legal background could have a look at the document.

Edit: the document is described as the sentence on probate lawsuit in the National Archives catalogue.

[Ili1133]

The daughter Ann who was born
 after her father died was actually born Jan 1731 her father died may 1730 so the pregnancy would not have been known til later

She
had the title DAME.when she married in 30 April 1750
But may have inherited title from her mother.
Her husband Charles  is Esq. The surname is GREGORY
Can't read the word after his first name

The marriage you’ve posted the screenshot of in 1750 is between Dame ELIZABETH Chaplin and Charles Gregory Wade esq. John’s widow remarried 20 years after his death. Of course ‘your’ Ann may have married a Gregory too.

[Ili1133]

It appears that Ann married Arthur Gregory at Oxford Chapel, Vere Street, London 3 Mar 1749. There is reference to a marriage settlement.

[brigidmac]

So the page of that record is correct I've just been sorting it out on tree

Ann's children Ann + Arthur were baptised

Could Dame Elizabeth in fact be Ann s mother widow of Porter CHAPLIN
 # correction
Widow of young Sir John

* Ann' 1730s mother was  Elizabeth MORRIS  Chaplin.widow of young Sir John
Unknown birth date but still "a minor" in 1730
I think all women were minors til age 30

[hanes teulu]

Porter Chaplin's wife was Ann Sherwin

[Ili1133]

There’s a 1728 Will for Ann Chaplin widow of Tathwell. That might sort out some of the earlier relationships. If you look in the National Archives catalogue the litigation went on for years so perhaps it was only when Ann married that Elizabeth herself was able to remarry ‘without prejudice’ to her daughter.