The meaning of a medieval term

[PtE]

Hi everyone,
Hoping someone can help me with the term “late of” in early documents. Will put this into context, “as to the manor late of Joe Bloggs”. I know that this doesn’t mean that Mr Bloggs is deceased, so, is it more likely to mean that he was formerly/previously the owner of the manor, or he has become the owner of late ie currently/recently ?. When I am trying to determine the dates of certain events either meaning can make a difference.
Best regards
PtE

[Vance Mead]

It would mean formerly or previously.

[maddys52]

Yes, I agree "late of" in this case means "previously of".

[PtE]

Thank you very much, now I can figure out who the manor was subsequently sold to.
Lovely job!
Pte

[Vance Mead]

Information about ownership of manors is often in the Victoria County History.

[PtE]

Thank you for that, it may certainly come in handy at some stage. In the case that I am researching at the moment, I do consult Edward Hasted’s survey of different parishes and here he has given me the surname of the family and their residence, but I needed to find out whether it was the father or the son who purchased the manor. Having read the Wills of both men they only refer to their manors, lands etc. in Kent or Sussex or various counties, without naming any particular properties, so not helpful. That’s the joy of research, you have to think of other ways to come up with a solution if it’s not spelt out for you.
all the best
PtE

[shanreagh]

Just a point it is not just a medieval term. If you read older newspapers it appears very frequently. Sometimes in the 'comings and goings' columns.

Such as 'Mr Roger D**phy late of the King's Treasury has left all of his wealth to Roostchat poster Shanreagh following his move to Pentonville'   

[Vance Mead]

In Medieval records "late of" would have been a translation of nuper, which could have a few shades of meaning, depending on context. In the case of "my manor of Newport, late of John Smith", it means formerly, without indication of whether John Smith is living or dead. In Common Pleas and Kings bench records, people are usually recorded as "John Smith, nuper de Newport", or "late of Newport". Here it means at one time, when the lawsuit was begun, and possibly still. Here the presumption is that John Smith is still alive. If a litigant died, then the lawsuit would continue in the name of their administrator or executor. This was not always the case. Communication was slow, so John Smith might still be a litigant until about six months after his death.

[PtE]

Thanks again, I have noticed that some Inquisitions into certain people who have since died would be noted as “Post Mortem”, so, in the case that I was researching, that term was not employed, and, besides which, I have at least three pieces of evidence that the gentleman was alive many years later.
I have not come across the word nuper however, so will bear that one in mind.
Thanks also to Shanreagh for your input.
Regards
Pte