In a literary dialogue online in the novel, Le Mystère de l'Académie d'Hèlba-Nerka I find this excerpt: "...que le père d'une Fryzarde pouvait être un elfe ou encore son propre nom, Taïlaranne..." which translates as "...that the father of Fryzarde could be an elf or else his own name, Taïlaranne...", indicating use as a given name in at least this example of French literature. -------------- Original message -------------- From: Christopher M Richards <cmr1ch6rd7@blueyonder.co.uk> > I'm wondering if what you have written as "ff" is actually the 16th > century way of writing a capital F. And that makes me wonder about the > rest of the letters. > Is it possible to scan the name and let us see what it looks like. > > Christopher Richards > > Mike Nason wrote: > > In a will dated 1586 one of Edmond Nason's daughter's had the name > > 'ffryzarde'. A respected opinion was that the name could have been a > > version of 'Frideswide' (patron saint of Oxford). > > > > I have no reason to now reject that possibility but write to ask if > > anyone would venture an opinion as to how 'ffryzarde' might have been > > pronounced in Warwickshire, in 1586! I am re-visiting the will and > > perhaps idly speculating on other possible origins for the name, > > wondering what the local accent and the phoenetic spelling of the scribe > > might have done to the 'real' name. I have not seen any similar names > > in any other source of the period. > > > > Mike Nason > > > > > > > > > > ==================================== > > WEB PAGE: http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~oel/ > > ARCHIVES: http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index?list=OLD-ENGLISH > > > > ------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > OLD-ENGLISH-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes > in the subject and the body of the message > > > > > > > > > > ========================== ========== > WEB PAGE: http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~oel/ > ARCHIVES: http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index?list=OLD-ENGLISH > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > OLD-ENGLISH-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes > in the subject and the body of the message

Mike - > In a will dated 1586 one of Edmond Nason's daughter's had the name > 'ffryzarde'. A respected opinion was that the name could have been a > version of 'Frideswide' (patron saint of Oxford). > > I have no reason to now reject that possibility but write to ask if > anyone would venture an opinion as to how 'ffryzarde' might have been > pronounced in Warwickshire, in 1586! I am re-visiting the will and > perhaps idly speculating on other possible origins for the name, > wondering what the local accent and the phoenetic spelling of the scribe > might have done to the 'real' name. I have not seen any similar names > in any other source of the period. Within Oxfordshire variants are found in the baptism registers. I've looked at the Great Milton baptisms, and find the following (from the Oxfordshire FHS transcript): 1567 HUMFRY Friswede 1568 DIGWEED Friswth 1586 PHELPE Frisses 1588 SEIXON Fressus 1617 BEAKE Frises 1619 CALLIS Frises 1813 STEVENS Frideswide and in Henley: 1622 HAWNCE Friswid Wendy Baptism Index Co-ordinator, Oxfordshire FHS www.ofhs.org.uk

Mike The way you have it transcribed it is definately not derived from Anglo-Saxon as you 'respected opinion' has thought..any way that I might see the original? Cheers KB Gray NY > Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 16:39:52 +0000> From: mfcn@btinternet.com> To: OLD-ENGLISH@rootsweb.com> Subject: [OEL] C16th given name> > In a will dated 1586 one of Edmond Nason's daughter's had the name > 'ffryzarde'. A respected opinion was that the name could have been a > version of 'Frideswide' (patron saint of Oxford).> > I have no reason to now reject that possibility but write to ask if > anyone would venture an opinion as to how 'ffryzarde' might have been > pronounced in Warwickshire, in 1586! I am re-visiting the will and > perhaps idly speculating on other possible origins for the name, > wondering what the local accent and the phoenetic spelling of the scribe > might have done to the 'real' name. I have not seen any similar names > in any other source of the period.> > Mike Nason> > > > > ====================================> WEB PAGE: http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~oel/> ARCHIVES: http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index?list=OLD-ENGLISH > > -------------------------------> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to OLD-ENGLISH-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message _________________________________________________________________ Windows Live™: Keep your life in sync. http://windowslive.com/howitworks?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_t1_allup_howitworks_012009

I'm wondering if what you have written as "ff" is actually the 16th century way of writing a capital F. And that makes me wonder about the rest of the letters. Is it possible to scan the name and let us see what it looks like. Christopher Richards Mike Nason wrote: > In a will dated 1586 one of Edmond Nason's daughter's had the name > 'ffryzarde'. A respected opinion was that the name could have been a > version of 'Frideswide' (patron saint of Oxford). > > I have no reason to now reject that possibility but write to ask if > anyone would venture an opinion as to how 'ffryzarde' might have been > pronounced in Warwickshire, in 1586! I am re-visiting the will and > perhaps idly speculating on other possible origins for the name, > wondering what the local accent and the phoenetic spelling of the scribe > might have done to the 'real' name. I have not seen any similar names > in any other source of the period. > > Mike Nason > > > > > ==================================== > WEB PAGE: http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~oel/ > ARCHIVES: http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index?list=OLD-ENGLISH > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to OLD-ENGLISH-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > >

In a will dated 1586 one of Edmond Nason's daughter's had the name 'ffryzarde'. A respected opinion was that the name could have been a version of 'Frideswide' (patron saint of Oxford). I have no reason to now reject that possibility but write to ask if anyone would venture an opinion as to how 'ffryzarde' might have been pronounced in Warwickshire, in 1586! I am re-visiting the will and perhaps idly speculating on other possible origins for the name, wondering what the local accent and the phoenetic spelling of the scribe might have done to the 'real' name. I have not seen any similar names in any other source of the period. Mike Nason

I'm going for the Frideswide explanation and the double ff being the 16th century way of expressing capital F. If you go to the following website it gives alternative spellings: http://homepages.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~oel/givennames.html#F This website has been developed by the people transcribing early parish registers for Free Reg. best wishes, GAY Gay J Oliver, Stalybridge, Cheshire gayandmike.co.uk tamesidefamilyhistory.co.uk ashtongrammar.co.uk www.tamesidehistoryforum.org.uk www.fhsc.org.uk/fhsc/dukinfield.htm

Dear All, I thought, in return for all your kindness and thoughts on the subject, that I should let you know that I have solved the problem of Nunc: child. While reading again the book by C D Rogers I found his explanation to be nuncupative child, or a child not baptised, which I think is what I suspected. Thanks once again for all your help! Barbara

Hi Barbara As I am away from home working at the moment I cannot rely on any of my normal reference books to support my statement. However a quick Google turned up this: http://kamsbrain.com/Papers/williamharvey.pdf A Seventeenth-Century Stew: Midwives, Infant Baptism, and William Harvey by Kimberly McWorter Published in "The Cornerstone Historical Journal", no. 25 June 2004 Department of History, University of California Riverside I thought this warranted a wider audience so have copied this to the List. A Happy New Year! Polly ----- Original Message ----- From: "Barbara Walker" <msbwalker@tiscali.co.uk> To: "Polly Rubery" <polly@rowberry.org> Sent: Wednesday, December 31, 2008 9:33 AM Subject: Re: [OEL] re Nunc child Hi Polly I have been enjoying this thread over the past few days but was surprised to hear that all midwives were licenced by the church and could baptise in the 1620s. I had assumed that midwifery might have been a little more anarchic than that, especially in the countryside. Many thanks Barbara W ----- Original Message ----- From: "Polly Rubery" <polly@rowberry.org> To: "A Lee" <alee231@btinternet.com>; "Barbara Youds" <barbara.youds@ntlworld.com>; <eve@varneys.org.uk>; "OLD-ENGLISH@rootsweb. com" <OLD-ENGLISH@rootsweb.com> Sent: Wednesday, December 31, 2008 6:14 AM Subject: Re: [OEL] re Nunc child > Hi Audrey > > No a child can be baptised by anyone, and midwives were licenced by the > church for this very reason. > So the fact that no name is given indicates that the child was never > baptised, even by a midwife. > Polly > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "A Lee" <alee231@btinternet.com> > To: "Barbara Youds" <barbara.youds@ntlworld.com>; <eve@varneys.org.uk>; > "OLD-ENGLISH@rootsweb. com" > <OLD-ENGLISH@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2008 9:36 PM > Subject: Re: [OEL] re Nunc child > > > Could these babies have been born very sickly and baptized by the midwife? > This would mean that the midwife was "unqualified" to perform baptisisms > as > such but had, nevertheless, performed a baptism of sorts. I believe that > it > was the practice of midwives to do this where a child was born on the > point > of death. This could cover the nuncupative meaning. > > Audrey > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Barbara Youds" <barbara.youds@ntlworld.com> > To: <eve@varneys.org.uk>; "OLD-ENGLISH@rootsweb. com" > <OLD-ENGLISH@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2008 1:51 PM > Subject: Re: [OEL] re Nunc child > > >> Well spotted Eve! I have that booklet, and also others of more recent >> origin. It seems the jury is still out on the exact cause and while I am >> not >> enough of an expert to suggest that I might lay the debate to rest I am >> hoping to gain some insight from this particular PR, which as you have >> also >> guessed is in Lancashire, Ashton under Lyne to be precise. >> >> As far as nunc: child goes I do think, as I work through the register and >> find more examples, that these are unbaptised children and not >> necessarily >> illegitimate - I have just found a nunc: child and a wife of an >> individual >> buried in one coffin. This is the entry for the incumbent, Henry Fairfax, >> in >> VCH: >> He was a younger son of Sir Thomas Lord Fairfax, and was fellow of >> Trinity >> College, Cambridge; inherited Oglethorpe, near Tadcaster, where he >> died..... >> His eldest son Henry, born at Ashton, became the fourth Lord Fairfax; a >> younger son, Brian, was an author. >> >> So perhaps not the half educated curate I imagined at first. >> >> Thank you to everyone for this - you have all helped confirm my idea of >> what >> these children were, even if there are still puzzling aspects to his use >> of >> the word. I will be sure to acknowledge you all!(Though, if my tutors are >> familiar with the term I could write almost anything I wished I think :-) >> >> Barbara Y >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: eve@varneys.org.uk [mailto:eve@varneys.org.uk] >> Sent: 30 December 2008 13:06 >> To: Barbara Youds >> Subject: Re: [OEL] re Nunc child >> >> > The reason I would like to know is that I am looking at a mortality >>> crisis and the term abortive is given for many burials indicating >>> possibly the effects of a famine and I need to be able to assign these >>> nunc entries to a particular category of burial in order to come up >>> with a set of stats to manipulate. >> >> Is this the mortality crisis of 1623, which Dr Colin Rogers studied as >> affecting a large number of Lancs parishes - way back in 1979 or so? >> He did publish a paper on it - but I dare say you are familiar with this. >> I recall he concluded it was famine related, since mothers are babies >> were malnourished and so died. >> No virus found in this incoming message. >> Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com >> Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.1/1868 - Release Date: >> 29/12/2008 >> 10:48 >> >> No virus found in this outgoing message. >> Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com >> Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.1/1868 - Release Date: >> 29/12/2008 >> 10:48 >> >> >> >> ==================================== >> WEB PAGE: http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~oel/ >> ARCHIVES: http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index?list=OLD-ENGLISH >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> OLD-ENGLISH-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >> quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com > Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.1/1869 - Release Date: > 30/12/2008 > 12:06 > > > > > > ==================================== > WEB PAGE: http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~oel/ > ARCHIVES: http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index?list=OLD-ENGLISH > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > OLD-ENGLISH-request@rootsweb.com with the word > 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the > message > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ==================================== > WEB PAGE: http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~oel/ > ARCHIVES: http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index?list=OLD-ENGLISH > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > OLD-ENGLISH-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Hello Polly, Audrey and list, before I write another word let me say that what follows relates, from the reformation onwards, entirely to the C of E. Other churches had their own way of doing things. The matter of baptism by midwives - or indeed by lay people generally- has had a chequered history over the centuries. The early church appears to have regarded lay baptism as irregular and to be avoided except in cases of extreme urgency. Later, in medieval England, and according to the "Prayer Book Dictionary", lay baptisms were frequent. This continued through to the first two Edwardian Prayer Books of the Reformed Church which set out a simple form of private baptism but also warned that "without great cause and necessity they baptise not children at home in their houses" In the reign of Queen Elizabeth there is evidence that midwives received written permission from the Bishops to perform the rite in an emergency. However, in perhaps one of the very few matters in which James I, the Church and the Puritans seem to have been in agreement, "the irregularity of lay baptism was so strongly and widely felt" that in 1604 the rubrics of the Prayer Book were altered so as to make no mention of baptism by any other than a " lawful minister" and in 1662 they were still further revised in the same direction. Charles Wheatly's "A Rational Illustration of the Book of Common Prayer" published in !720 and then at frequent intervals at least until 1848 is a series of notes to all the services advising clergy and commenting on questions that may arise in connection with the 1662 Prayer Book. In it he states that "...... it was determined that in the absence of the Minister of the Parish "any other lawful Minister is to be called in that can be procured". Briefly the argument ran that "where God gives no opportunty of having baptism administered by a person duly commissioned it seems much better to leave it undone"..This same 1662 Prayer Book sets out the form of baptism for the Minister to use in these circumstances and Wheatly notes that a child baptised in the manner prescribed is "lawfully and sufficiently baptised". If the child so baptised lives then Wheatly states that it is expedient that he or she be brought into the church so that the congregation "may be certified of the true form of baptism .......privately before used". If the baptism was by any other lawful MInister than the priest of the parish where the child was born then the parish priest is "to examine and try" those who were present at the baptism as to "whether the child be lawfully baptised or no"., which meant, in brief, by whom and how? If the answers show that "all things were done as they ought to be then he is not to christen the child again but to receive him as one of the flock of true christian people" There is then a form of service for this reception into the congregation. It is interesting to note that the first words in the 1662 service of * public* baptism are "Hath this child been already baptised or no?" Only if the answer is "no" does the baptismal service proceed. In the 19th c the matter arose again in both public discussion and in the courts, but that is another story for another day ! And in that this message relates more to later postings than to the original question I apologise !! Jim Halsey On Wed, Dec 31, 2008 at 6:14 AM, Polly Rubery <polly@rowberry.org> wrote: > No a child can be baptised by anyone, and midwives were licenced by the > church for this very reason. > So the fact that no name is given indicates that the child was never > baptised, even by a midwife. > Polly > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

Hi Audrey No a child can be baptised by anyone, and midwives were licenced by the church for this very reason. So the fact that no name is given indicates that the child was never baptised, even by a midwife. Polly ----- Original Message ----- From: "A Lee" <alee231@btinternet.com> To: "Barbara Youds" <barbara.youds@ntlworld.com>; <eve@varneys.org.uk>; "OLD-ENGLISH@rootsweb. com" <OLD-ENGLISH@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2008 9:36 PM Subject: Re: [OEL] re Nunc child Could these babies have been born very sickly and baptized by the midwife? This would mean that the midwife was "unqualified" to perform baptisisms as such but had, nevertheless, performed a baptism of sorts. I believe that it was the practice of midwives to do this where a child was born on the point of death. This could cover the nuncupative meaning. Audrey ----- Original Message ----- From: "Barbara Youds" <barbara.youds@ntlworld.com> To: <eve@varneys.org.uk>; "OLD-ENGLISH@rootsweb. com" <OLD-ENGLISH@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2008 1:51 PM Subject: Re: [OEL] re Nunc child > Well spotted Eve! I have that booklet, and also others of more recent > origin. It seems the jury is still out on the exact cause and while I am > not > enough of an expert to suggest that I might lay the debate to rest I am > hoping to gain some insight from this particular PR, which as you have > also > guessed is in Lancashire, Ashton under Lyne to be precise. > > As far as nunc: child goes I do think, as I work through the register and > find more examples, that these are unbaptised children and not necessarily > illegitimate - I have just found a nunc: child and a wife of an individual > buried in one coffin. This is the entry for the incumbent, Henry Fairfax, > in > VCH: > He was a younger son of Sir Thomas Lord Fairfax, and was fellow of Trinity > College, Cambridge; inherited Oglethorpe, near Tadcaster, where he > died..... > His eldest son Henry, born at Ashton, became the fourth Lord Fairfax; a > younger son, Brian, was an author. > > So perhaps not the half educated curate I imagined at first. > > Thank you to everyone for this - you have all helped confirm my idea of > what > these children were, even if there are still puzzling aspects to his use > of > the word. I will be sure to acknowledge you all!(Though, if my tutors are > familiar with the term I could write almost anything I wished I think :-) > > Barbara Y > > -----Original Message----- > From: eve@varneys.org.uk [mailto:eve@varneys.org.uk] > Sent: 30 December 2008 13:06 > To: Barbara Youds > Subject: Re: [OEL] re Nunc child > > > The reason I would like to know is that I am looking at a mortality >> crisis and the term abortive is given for many burials indicating >> possibly the effects of a famine and I need to be able to assign these >> nunc entries to a particular category of burial in order to come up >> with a set of stats to manipulate. > > Is this the mortality crisis of 1623, which Dr Colin Rogers studied as > affecting a large number of Lancs parishes - way back in 1979 or so? > He did publish a paper on it - but I dare say you are familiar with this. > I recall he concluded it was famine related, since mothers are babies > were malnourished and so died. > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com > Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.1/1868 - Release Date: > 29/12/2008 > 10:48 > > No virus found in this outgoing message. > Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com > Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.1/1868 - Release Date: > 29/12/2008 > 10:48 > > > > ==================================== > WEB PAGE: http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~oel/ > ARCHIVES: http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index?list=OLD-ENGLISH > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > OLD-ENGLISH-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.1/1869 - Release Date: 30/12/2008 12:06 ==================================== WEB PAGE: http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~oel/ ARCHIVES: http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index?list=OLD-ENGLISH ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to OLD-ENGLISH-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Could these babies have been born very sickly and baptized by the midwife? This would mean that the midwife was "unqualified" to perform baptisisms as such but had, nevertheless, performed a baptism of sorts. I believe that it was the practice of midwives to do this where a child was born on the point of death. This could cover the nuncupative meaning. Audrey ----- Original Message ----- From: "Barbara Youds" <barbara.youds@ntlworld.com> To: <eve@varneys.org.uk>; "OLD-ENGLISH@rootsweb. com" <OLD-ENGLISH@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2008 1:51 PM Subject: Re: [OEL] re Nunc child > Well spotted Eve! I have that booklet, and also others of more recent > origin. It seems the jury is still out on the exact cause and while I am > not > enough of an expert to suggest that I might lay the debate to rest I am > hoping to gain some insight from this particular PR, which as you have > also > guessed is in Lancashire, Ashton under Lyne to be precise. > > As far as nunc: child goes I do think, as I work through the register and > find more examples, that these are unbaptised children and not necessarily > illegitimate - I have just found a nunc: child and a wife of an individual > buried in one coffin. This is the entry for the incumbent, Henry Fairfax, > in > VCH: > He was a younger son of Sir Thomas Lord Fairfax, and was fellow of Trinity > College, Cambridge; inherited Oglethorpe, near Tadcaster, where he > died..... > His eldest son Henry, born at Ashton, became the fourth Lord Fairfax; a > younger son, Brian, was an author. > > So perhaps not the half educated curate I imagined at first. > > Thank you to everyone for this - you have all helped confirm my idea of > what > these children were, even if there are still puzzling aspects to his use > of > the word. I will be sure to acknowledge you all!(Though, if my tutors are > familiar with the term I could write almost anything I wished I think :-) > > Barbara Y > > -----Original Message----- > From: eve@varneys.org.uk [mailto:eve@varneys.org.uk] > Sent: 30 December 2008 13:06 > To: Barbara Youds > Subject: Re: [OEL] re Nunc child > > > The reason I would like to know is that I am looking at a mortality >> crisis and the term abortive is given for many burials indicating >> possibly the effects of a famine and I need to be able to assign these >> nunc entries to a particular category of burial in order to come up >> with a set of stats to manipulate. > > Is this the mortality crisis of 1623, which Dr Colin Rogers studied as > affecting a large number of Lancs parishes - way back in 1979 or so? > He did publish a paper on it - but I dare say you are familiar with this. > I recall he concluded it was famine related, since mothers are babies > were malnourished and so died. > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com > Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.1/1868 - Release Date: > 29/12/2008 > 10:48 > > No virus found in this outgoing message. > Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com > Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.1/1868 - Release Date: > 29/12/2008 > 10:48 > > > > ==================================== > WEB PAGE: http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~oel/ > ARCHIVES: http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index?list=OLD-ENGLISH > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > OLD-ENGLISH-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.1/1869 - Release Date: 30/12/2008 12:06

In a message dated 30/12/2008 14:09:44 GMT Standard Time, moorejo@reach.net writes: >My now wife means my present wife as opposed to a former wife who had died. I have seen one or two cases where it referred to the only wife the man had. Regards, John Moore "Now wife" has been discussed on this list before and I seem to recall that the consensus was that it did not imply there had been a former wife. Obviously in some cases there might have been a former wife but in the drawing up of the will the lawyers used the term very literally: wife at this present moment . Best wishes, Margaret McGregor.

Well spotted Eve! I have that booklet, and also others of more recent origin. It seems the jury is still out on the exact cause and while I am not enough of an expert to suggest that I might lay the debate to rest I am hoping to gain some insight from this particular PR, which as you have also guessed is in Lancashire, Ashton under Lyne to be precise. As far as nunc: child goes I do think, as I work through the register and find more examples, that these are unbaptised children and not necessarily illegitimate - I have just found a nunc: child and a wife of an individual buried in one coffin. This is the entry for the incumbent, Henry Fairfax, in VCH: He was a younger son of Sir Thomas Lord Fairfax, and was fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge; inherited Oglethorpe, near Tadcaster, where he died..... His eldest son Henry, born at Ashton, became the fourth Lord Fairfax; a younger son, Brian, was an author. So perhaps not the half educated curate I imagined at first. Thank you to everyone for this - you have all helped confirm my idea of what these children were, even if there are still puzzling aspects to his use of the word. I will be sure to acknowledge you all!(Though, if my tutors are familiar with the term I could write almost anything I wished I think :-) Barbara Y -----Original Message----- From: eve@varneys.org.uk [mailto:eve@varneys.org.uk] Sent: 30 December 2008 13:06 To: Barbara Youds Subject: Re: [OEL] re Nunc child > The reason I would like to know is that I am looking at a mortality > crisis and the term abortive is given for many burials indicating > possibly the effects of a famine and I need to be able to assign these > nunc entries to a particular category of burial in order to come up > with a set of stats to manipulate. Is this the mortality crisis of 1623, which Dr Colin Rogers studied as affecting a large number of Lancs parishes - way back in 1979 or so? He did publish a paper on it - but I dare say you are familiar with this. I recall he concluded it was famine related, since mothers are babies were malnourished and so died. No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.1/1868 - Release Date: 29/12/2008 10:48 No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.1/1868 - Release Date: 29/12/2008 10:48

Could 'nunc' mean that nothing official was written down at the time or witnessed in a legally binding way as with a nuncupative will? Barbara W ----- Original Message ----- From: "Polly Rubery" <polly@rowberry.org> To: <OLD-ENGLISH@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2008 12:38 PM Subject: Re: [OEL] re Nunc child > Further to Matt's response: > >>>22nd Oct - A child nunc: et alter ex gemell: Jacobi Scholefield > 25th Oct - Josephe s. Of James Scholefield alter ex gemellis > > Joseph was baptised on the 22nd, possibly at the same time his twin was > buried. So it would appear that James Scholefield was the father of twins, > one of whom died before it was baptised. > <snip> > On the other hand it's a bit difficult to see why the clerk should record > a child as 'nuncupative' > if by that he meant 'named' - if it had been named, why not record it by > that name? > <snip> > The two examples you quote are interesting. If they are both burials > then, as you say, they seem to > record the successive burial of twins, only the second of whom is recorded > by name - but why the > word 'et' in the first entry? It seems to suggest both twins were buried > on the 22nd ("a child, of > unknown name, and the other of twins"). But perhaps 'alter' here means > not 'the other' but just > 'one of', making the sense "a child, of unknown name, and one of twins".<< > > In classical Latin, alter can mean "the one, the other (of two) so for the > first burial I read it as > > "A child "nunc:" and one out of the twins of James Scholefield" > > and for the second: > > "Josephe son of James Scholefield and the other out of the twins" > > However that still doesn't help with "nunc:" - unless he means it in the > sense that the child had > been named, but not baptised and so the name was not recognised by the > church... > > Like you it has me rather puzzled! > Polly > > > > ==================================== > WEB PAGE: http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~oel/ > ARCHIVES: http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index?list=OLD-ENGLISH > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > OLD-ENGLISH-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Further to Matt's response: >>22nd Oct - A child nunc: et alter ex gemell: Jacobi Scholefield 25th Oct - Josephe s. Of James Scholefield alter ex gemellis Joseph was baptised on the 22nd, possibly at the same time his twin was buried. So it would appear that James Scholefield was the father of twins, one of whom died before it was baptised. <snip> On the other hand it's a bit difficult to see why the clerk should record a child as 'nuncupative' if by that he meant 'named' - if it had been named, why not record it by that name? <snip> The two examples you quote are interesting. If they are both burials then, as you say, they seem to record the successive burial of twins, only the second of whom is recorded by name - but why the word 'et' in the first entry? It seems to suggest both twins were buried on the 22nd ("a child, of unknown name, and the other of twins"). But perhaps 'alter' here means not 'the other' but just 'one of', making the sense "a child, of unknown name, and one of twins".<< In classical Latin, alter can mean "the one, the other (of two) so for the first burial I read it as "A child "nunc:" and one out of the twins of James Scholefield" and for the second: "Josephe son of James Scholefield and the other out of the twins" However that still doesn't help with "nunc:" - unless he means it in the sense that the child had been named, but not baptised and so the name was not recognised by the church... Like you it has me rather puzzled! Polly

'Nunc' is latin for 'now', or 'at present'. My first guess would be that what is meant is 'at present a child'. Just possibly 'now with child', or 'now having a child'. The text might eliminate some of these, whether it seems to be used of an adult or of a child. Or whether it is always used of a woman. John Barton ----- Original Message ----- From: "Barbara Youds" <barbara.youds@ntlworld.com> To: <OLD-ENGLISH@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2008 10:56 AM Subject: [OEL] Nunc child >I am currently undertaking a local history course and have come across a > term that is puzzling not only my fellow students but also my tutor and > the > course director. It is from a parish register, burials, and is 'nunc: > child'. Between us we have worked out it would translate as 'declared > child' > and at first we thought this must refer to illegitimate children, but I am > now thinking it could relate to still births or late miscarriages or > possibly children who died before baptism. > > > > Has anyone else come across this term or have any suggestions please? > > > > Barbara > > > > ==================================== > WEB PAGE: http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~oel/ > ARCHIVES: http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index?list=OLD-ENGLISH > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > OLD-ENGLISH-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > __________ NOD32 3722 (20081229) Information __________ > > This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system. > http://www.eset.com > >

<<Thanks for all your thoughts on this. I should have mentioned that the time frame is c. 1620 and the incumbent used a mixture of Latin and English, and as far as I can tell (who has no Latin at all) not very well! We are fairly certain that the meaning will be now or declared child and at first thought it must mean declared as in a declaration of paternity made by the mother of an illegitimate child as other entries use the term base for illegitimate children. However.... (why is there always an 'however'?) I then found these entries: 22nd Oct - A child nunc: et alter ex gemell: Jacobi Scholefield 25th Oct - Josephe s. Of James Scholefield alter ex gemellis Joseph was baptised on the 22nd, possibly at the same time his twin was buried. So it would appear that James Scholefield was the father of twins, one of whom died before it was baptised. I wonder if this particular incumbent used the term nunc child for those children who died before baptism, that is 'declared' but not yet named before God? In other words these children were all non-viable for some reason, perhaps late miscarriages or still births rather than illegitimate? The reason I would like to know is that I am looking at a mortality crisis and the term abortive is given for many burials indicating possibly the effects of a famine and I need to be able to assign these nunc entries to a particular category of burial in order to come up with a set of stats to manipulate.>> Dear Barbara, Polly is surely right that the colon (at this time often used to indicate an abbreviation of a word) means it cannot be 'nunc', meaning 'now'. The most likely extension of 'nunc:' does seem to be 'nuncupative'. In the context of wills, this means 'oral, spoken', as opposed to written, but that is not its primary meaning, which is more to do with naming. In classical Latin 'nuncupo' meant 'to call, name', and in the medieval and early modern Latin used in England 'nuncupativus' meant 'named' (I've appended the entry for 'nuncupative' in Latham's Revised Medieval Latin Word-list - a more useful source for medieval and early modern English records than classical Latin dictionaries - at the end of this post). Consequently it seems unlikely that this clerk meant it to signify 'not yet named' (unless he mistakenly thought 'cupo' meant 'to name', and 'nuncupo' the opposite!). On the other hand it's a bit difficult to see why the clerk should record a child as 'nuncupative' if by that he meant 'named' - if it had been named, why not record it by that name? I have to confess to being baffled by it. My best guess is that perhaps the clerk used the word when he knew the child had been named but did not know the name, or could not recall it (in times of plague or famine or other upheaval the register might not have been written until some time afterwards). The two examples you quote are interesting. If they are both burials then, as you say, they seem to record the successive burial of twins, only the second of whom is recorded by name - but why the word 'et' in the first entry? It seems to suggest both twins were buried on the 22nd ("a child, of unknown name, and the other of twins"). But perhaps 'alter' here means not 'the other' but just 'one of', making the sense "a child, of unknown name, and one of twins". Your study sounds very interesting. Good luck with it. Matt Tompkins nuncupat/ive, literally, in virtue of the meaning of the word c1204; nominally, merely as a name c730. 12c., a 1452; -ivus, named, 793; nominal c1250, 14c; testamentum -ivum 1351, a 1564, t, -ive factum 1355, oral testament; -orius, naming, calling by name c793. This could be referenced in a footnote as: R.E. Latham, Medieval Latin Word-list from British and Irish Sources (Oxford, 1965), sub 'nuncupat'.

Hi Barbara Yes but you see what I mean about "naming" - rather than "un-named" or at least "unbaptised"... To reference anything from a List message, use its unique identity from the List Archives, which can then be found by anyone who wants to check your source (that's the whole idea of a reference isn't it?). This is: http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/OLD-ENGLISH/2008-12/1230627853 and then I think the normal thing is to add the date that you accessed the URL. You would probably want to add into your reference the fact that you had asked about the meaning of "nunc:" on the List first... HTH Polly ----- Original Message ----- From: "Barbara Youds" <barbara.youds@ntlworld.com> To: "OLD-ENGLISH@rootsweb. com" <OLD-ENGLISH@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2008 10:08 AM Subject: [OEL] re Nunc child Hi Polly, I thought it might be some kind of declaration and got these possible definitions: nuncupatio -onis f. [naming , pronouncement]. nuncupo -are [to name , call by name, to pronounce solemnly]. As you say the incumbent was very diligent and recorded far more than was necessary for most entries. (More of this in next email to the other Barbara!). The main year crisis was 1623 and this is when an awful lot of abortive children are recorded so he was recording every death, even possibly for non-viable births or very early miscarriages and I am thinking that his use of nunc: child must differentiate between those early miscarriages rather than later miscarriages or still births. A quirk of this particular register and curate I think. I have yet to investigate who this was, but it may shed light on the matter when I do. Thanks for your help. How do I reference you in my essay? :-) Barbara Y -----Original Message----- From: Polly Rubery [mailto:polly@rowberry.org] Sent: 30 December 2008 09:04 To: Barbara Youds; OLD-ENGLISH@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [OEL] re Nunc child Hi Barbara There are two important things here. In the example you quote here you use "nunc:" - the colon (:) at this time would indicate an abbreviation, so the word would not be "nunc" on its own, as obviously no abbreviation involved there. So the meaning is not now or present... >From the example given of the twins it would seem that it has been used to indicate a child which has not been baptised. The burial service was not supposed to be read for anyone (child or adult) who had not been baptised, and as the register is meant to be a register of services, many children buried in the churchyard before they are baptised go unrecorded. However in this case it seems that your chap was being far more assidous, and recording all the bodies buried, whether or not the service was read for them. You mention abortive - well obviously they could not have been baptised as they would have been born dead, and the same goes for still births. Here it would seem that the term is being used to indicate that the child was unbaptised, but quite how is interesting, as "nuncupative" seems more to mean "named" than the opposite... Polly ----- Original Message ----- From: "Barbara Youds" <barbara.youds@ntlworld.com> To: <OLD-ENGLISH@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2008 7:01 AM Subject: [OEL] re Nunc child No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.1/1868 - Release Date: 29/12/2008 10:48 No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.1/1868 - Release Date: 29/12/2008 10:48 No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.1/1868 - Release Date: 29/12/2008 10:48 ==================================== WEB PAGE: http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~oel/ ARCHIVES: http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index?list=OLD-ENGLISH ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to OLD-ENGLISH-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

It is interesting Barbara - and the register is a good read in itself. I have just come across another burial entry where he records the person as 'defunct', which, according to my books, means deceased. Now, if he felt it necessary to say this person was dead was he actually burying live people sometimes? :-) "What an interesting study. Good luck. I have enjoyed reading the mailings on this subject. Barbara" No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.1/1868 - Release Date: 29/12/2008 10:48

Hi Polly, I thought it might be some kind of declaration and got these possible definitions: nuncupatio -onis f. [naming , pronouncement]. nuncupo -are [to name , call by name, to pronounce solemnly]. As you say the incumbent was very diligent and recorded far more than was necessary for most entries. (More of this in next email to the other Barbara!). The main year crisis was 1623 and this is when an awful lot of abortive children are recorded so he was recording every death, even possibly for non-viable births or very early miscarriages and I am thinking that his use of nunc: child must differentiate between those early miscarriages rather than later miscarriages or still births. A quirk of this particular register and curate I think. I have yet to investigate who this was, but it may shed light on the matter when I do. Thanks for your help. How do I reference you in my essay? :-) Barbara Y -----Original Message----- From: Polly Rubery [mailto:polly@rowberry.org] Sent: 30 December 2008 09:04 To: Barbara Youds; OLD-ENGLISH@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [OEL] re Nunc child Hi Barbara There are two important things here. In the example you quote here you use "nunc:" - the colon (:) at this time would indicate an abbreviation, so the word would not be "nunc" on its own, as obviously no abbreviation involved there. So the meaning is not now or present... >From the example given of the twins it would seem that it has been used to indicate a child which has not been baptised. The burial service was not supposed to be read for anyone (child or adult) who had not been baptised, and as the register is meant to be a register of services, many children buried in the churchyard before they are baptised go unrecorded. However in this case it seems that your chap was being far more assidous, and recording all the bodies buried, whether or not the service was read for them. You mention abortive - well obviously they could not have been baptised as they would have been born dead, and the same goes for still births. Here it would seem that the term is being used to indicate that the child was unbaptised, but quite how is interesting, as "nuncupative" seems more to mean "named" than the opposite... Polly ----- Original Message ----- From: "Barbara Youds" <barbara.youds@ntlworld.com> To: <OLD-ENGLISH@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2008 7:01 AM Subject: [OEL] re Nunc child No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.1/1868 - Release Date: 29/12/2008 10:48 No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.1/1868 - Release Date: 29/12/2008 10:48 No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.1/1868 - Release Date: 29/12/2008 10:48