It would be the same as apprenticing somebody to a company. Although there wasn't companies as we know them now, the precedent was there. Somebody signing up for the army would sign up to serve the crown rather than who ever was on the throne at the time of signing. Likewise, a sailor would sign to a ship and serve the master, they would have continuity of employment even if the master dropped dead in the middle of the Atlantic. They would still serve on the same ship and still serve the master, the master may have a different name but he would still be the master. I would be good to have an authoritive opinion though. John At 23:27 15/02/2007, Robert Hillier wrote: >Thanks John , that sounds very reasonable . I have doubts however - was it >legally possible to tie the apprenticeship obligations to a property

Thanks John , that sounds very reasonable . I have doubts however - was it legally possible to tie the apprenticeship obligations to a property in such a way that they then transferred to a new tenant ? Wasn't an apprenticeship a contract between individuals ? In law , could an apprenticeship indenture be agreed with an estate ? A legal expert would be helpful here :>) Best wishes, Robert >>>>>>>>>>At a guess, if they where apprenticed to a tenant farmer and the farmer lost the tenancy, both the apprentice and tenant would still be tied to each other and thus both potential charges on the parish. If the apprentice was tied to the farm and the tenancy was lost, the apprentice would just carry on as before but with a new master. John<<<<<<<<<<<<<

Thanks very much for those OED entries Liz , so my parish register isn't a one-off . However , since the quoted items don't provide corroborating evidence , I would argue that one still doesn't know the significance of adding "spinster" to the woman's label in these cases - they're consistent with an indication of unmarried , but surely that is just not necessary since " Mrs BLOGGS , widow" can only refer to a woman without a living husband , so why add "spinster" ? Thanks again, Robert Hillier, Poole

Can any kind lister throw expert light on the 18th century use of the word "Estate" ? In the Parish Vestry Book of Holwell ( now in Dorset , then an exclave of Somerset ) in 1750-1751 , a number of young people are to be apprenticed , not to individuals but to the estates of named people . I am used to the modern use of the "estate" of a dead person , but is this the use intended here ? There seems to be rather a high proportion of apprenticing to estates of dead people to be likely , or is it ? Was there another use of "estate" at the time which would explain this ? I don't think the usage implies the modern-style "corporate" estates of agribusiness or of "aristo" Woburn style estates . Holwell agriculture was typically pasturing , one of lots of small landowners with tenant farmers and subletting to dairymen , not of big estates . Thus I would have expected that apprenticeships would be to specific individuals , rather than "corporate entities" . Here are the entries - I have not suppressed any apprenticeship entries from these years , so it is a complete "sample" : 18.11.1750 was agreed at a Vestry then held that James Line son of Jno. Line should be put an apprentice to the Estate that Allin T/Fothervile now lives on. Likewise George the son of George Richards to Ambrose Damer. 8.4.1751 Also agreed that Wm. Chaffie son of Thos. Chaffie should be put out as Apprentice to Caddies Estate and his son George an Apprentice to (Mrs Lane crossed through) Wm. Coombs Estate and Reuben Richards, son of George Richards, to Mr Nicholas Gillingham's Estate and Nicholas Clark son of Nicholas Clark to ffarmer Jno. Kiddles Estate. 5.5.1751 Agreed Ruth Richards daughter of George Richards to be put to Mrs Lanes Estate So out of seven apprenticeships to be paid for by the parish , six are to "estates" and only one to an individual . Odd or not ? TIA, Robert Hillier, Poole, Dorset

exclusionary? At 4:53 PM -0500 2/12/07, [email protected] wrote: >Short of posting an image of the page, I wonder if someone might come up with >the incomplete word in the first line of this sentence from a 1769 PCC will: > >Item I Give and Devise All that my **sionary(?) Estate Right >and Interest in and to all that Messuage or Tenement >Farm Lands and Hereditts. Situate at Cobham in the said >County of Kent... > >Thank you! > >Alejandro Milberg >Boston, Mass. -- Ruth Barton [email protected] Dummerston, VT

That's what it is, Margaret - thank you very much! Alejandro Might the word be "reversionary"? i.e. an estate which will revert to him? Best wishes, Margaret.

Might the word be "reversionary"? i.e. an estate which will revert to him? Best wishes, Margaret.

Short of posting an image of the page, I wonder if someone might come up with the incomplete word in the first line of this sentence from a 1769 PCC will: Item I Give and Devise All that my **sionary(?) Estate Right and Interest in and to all that Messuage or Tenement Farm Lands and Hereditts. Situate at Cobham in the said County of Kent... Thank you! Alejandro Milberg Boston, Mass.

Hi Audrey, This was a thread that ran to completion back in March 2004. On checking the archives, there was a message from me saying: "I built a response to this hours ago but when I hit send my PC broke and my Outbox was corrupted. I've been going round in circles cursing Microsoft's helpful help files ever since!! I am now on my ISP's web-mail facility which is very basic!! My filing will be even more out of control!" I then went on with a reconstructed response. So 3 years later, when I attached that old Outlook .pst file to my new Outlook, it must have finally solved the Outbox corruption problem. Well done, Microsoft!!! :-) My filing is still in disarray after the head crash on my new hard drive. Ho hum... Liz in Melbourne -----Original Message----- From: norman lee [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, 7 February 2007 11:09 AM To: [email protected]; 'Karen Bennett'; [email protected] Subject: Re: [OEL] old will again Dear Liz A long time ago now, I seem to remember my father talking about a pub that was an old coaching inn in Southwark. This was called "The George" and had a square courtyard preserved. Of course, this may have disappeared by now. The time he was thinking of would have been the early 70s. Audrey ----- Original Message ----- From: <[email protected]> To: "'Karen Bennett'" <[email protected]>; <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 6:44 AM Subject: Re: [OEL] old will again snip > > On Sunday, March 14, 2004 4:37 PM, Karen Bennett > [SMTP:[email protected]] wrote: >> thanks liz >> snip >

Hi Robert, Perhaps this was spinster in the original meaning. The OED has: 1. a. A woman (or, rarely, a man) who spins, esp. one who practises spinning as a regular occupation. [Still in use in this sense in 1910, according to the OED citations: 1910 Contemp. Rev. July 31 She would be a famous spinster and needlewoman.] 2. a. Appended to names of women, originally in order to denote their occupation, but subsequently (from the 17th century) as the proper legal designation of one still unmarried. Two of the citations for the second of the above meanings are: 1564-5 in 10th Rep. Hist. MSS. Comm. (1885) 27 Joan Lambe, widow of London, spynster. 1580-1 Ibid., Margaretta Tirrell spinster, alias dicta Margaretta Tirrell uxor Thome Tirrell. Cheers, Liz in Melbourne -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Robert Hillier Sent: Wednesday, 7 February 2007 9:02 AM To: [email protected] Subject: [OEL] Widow and spinster Idle curiosity on my part : What was meant by "Widow and spinster" in four entries in the early 18th C. in the Burial Register for the parish of Holnest , Dorset ? Here's an example : Agness BRIDLE "Wid: & Spinster" buried 1.3.1705/6 TIA, Robert Hillier, Poole, Dorset ==================================== 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 [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

hello liz I did wonder what was going on - to receive an answer 3 years later thanks anyway cheers karen

Dear Liz A long time ago now, I seem to remember my father talking about a pub that was an old coaching inn in Southwark. This was called "The George" and had a square courtyard preserved. Of course, this may have disappeared by now. The time he was thinking of would have been the early 70s. Audrey ----- Original Message ----- From: <[email protected]> To: "'Karen Bennett'" <[email protected]>; <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 6:44 AM Subject: Re: [OEL] old will again > It does look like GeorgeYard. > > Yes - there were several George Yards, one of them in Southwark. Its a > little > narrow street which runs west off Borough High Street just north of St > George's > church. Borough High Street is a continuation south south west from > London > Bridge. This is from my Regency A-Z of London - a brilliant street > atlas based > on Richard Horwood's map of 1789-1819. > > George Yard isn't marked on my tattered 1960s A-Z - it has probably > disappeared a long time ago. It is actually quite difficult to relate > the two maps > to each other. > > Newington Causeway isn't on my Regency A-Z but is in the 1960s A-Z as > the continuation of the Borough High Street starting a short distance > SSW > of St George's and runs to the Elephant & Castle. > > It would have been just a short walk from No 11 Newington Causeway to > George Yard. > > > Cheers, > > Liz in Melbourne > > On Sunday, March 14, 2004 4:37 PM, Karen Bennett > [SMTP:[email protected]] wrote: >> thanks liz >> >> could I ask for help with another word in the third line >> >> of Surrey and of the Georgeyard ?? >> >> this is repeated in line 25 >> >> the Georgeyard afoursaid >> >> am i right in reading it as the Georgeyard and any ideas what that > could be >> thanks again >> karen > > > > ==================================== > 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 > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

Idle curiosity on my part : What was meant by "Widow and spinster" in four entries in the early 18th C. in the Burial Register for the parish of Holnest , Dorset ? Here's an example : Agness BRIDLE "Wid: & Spinster" buried 1.3.1705/6 TIA, Robert Hillier, Poole, Dorset

Hi all, Apologies for that message - strange are the ways of PCs!! I have just come back on-line after a fatal disk head crash and I certainly did not send that one consciously. I wonder where it has been for the last 3 years!!! Luckily most of my data was recently saved, so I have lost little, only about a week's worth. It's all this system rebuilding that's frustrating... Cheers and back soon-ish, Liz in Melbourne -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of [email protected] Sent: Tuesday, 6 February 2007 5:44 PM To: 'Karen Bennett'; [email protected] Subject: Re: [OEL] old will again It does look like GeorgeYard. Yes - there were several George Yards, one of them in Southwark. Its a little narrow street which runs west off Borough High Street just north of St George's church. Borough High Street is a continuation south south west from London Bridge. This is from my Regency A-Z of London - a brilliant street atlas based on Richard Horwood's map of 1789-1819. George Yard isn't marked on my tattered 1960s A-Z - it has probably disappeared a long time ago. It is actually quite difficult to relate the two maps to each other. Newington Causeway isn't on my Regency A-Z but is in the 1960s A-Z as the continuation of the Borough High Street starting a short distance SSW of St George's and runs to the Elephant & Castle. It would have been just a short walk from No 11 Newington Causeway to George Yard. Cheers, Liz in Melbourne On Sunday, March 14, 2004 4:37 PM, Karen Bennett [SMTP:[email protected]] wrote: > thanks liz > > could I ask for help with another word in the third line > > of Surrey and of the Georgeyard ?? > > this is repeated in line 25 > > the Georgeyard afoursaid > > am i right in reading it as the Georgeyard and any ideas what that could be > thanks again > karen

It does look like GeorgeYard. Yes - there were several George Yards, one of them in Southwark. Its a little narrow street which runs west off Borough High Street just north of St George's church. Borough High Street is a continuation south south west from London Bridge. This is from my Regency A-Z of London - a brilliant street atlas based on Richard Horwood's map of 1789-1819. George Yard isn't marked on my tattered 1960s A-Z - it has probably disappeared a long time ago. It is actually quite difficult to relate the two maps to each other. Newington Causeway isn't on my Regency A-Z but is in the 1960s A-Z as the continuation of the Borough High Street starting a short distance SSW of St George's and runs to the Elephant & Castle. It would have been just a short walk from No 11 Newington Causeway to George Yard. Cheers, Liz in Melbourne On Sunday, March 14, 2004 4:37 PM, Karen Bennett [SMTP:[email protected]] wrote: > thanks liz > > could I ask for help with another word in the third line > > of Surrey and of the Georgeyard ?? > > this is repeated in line 25 > > the Georgeyard afoursaid > > am i right in reading it as the Georgeyard and any ideas what that could be > thanks again > karen

Hi Lyn and Audrey, Many thanks for replying. It's good to know that other people have come across young, or under 21 year old, witnesses. I appreciate your help. Kind regards, Yvonne >> From: norman lee [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 04 February 2007 23:25 To: Lyn Boothman; 'Yvonne Purdy'; [email protected] Subject: Re: [OEL] Age to be a witness There are various ages for different things when it comes to being a witness and being of age. A.J. Camp's book is fairly old now but very useful in describing these things. Audrey << > To: "'Yvonne Purdy'" <[email protected]>; <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2007 8:58 PM Subject: Re: [OEL] Age to be a witness > Just catching up with emails - I've never seen anything definative but > I've > certainly seen people I know to be under 21 witness documents, and also > made > trustees as well in a couple of cases. Lyn B

> The suffix "kin" in a name such as Tomkinson is described as a > diminutive, suggesting an affectionate connotation. Is it possible > that it might have been used in the present sense of the addition of > "Junior" after a name? Tomkinson would then be the "son of the son > of Tom", which seems to make sense. > I may have got to the first user of the name Tomkinson, and > have several names in the area without surnames, who could > be possible forebears. It struck me that I could looking for > Tom, the son of Tom. Hello again Don, your recent posts on a subject so close to my own heart have enticed me to resubscribe. It must be likely that some medieval men named Thomas were called Thomkin to distinguish them from a father who was also named Thomas, but unfortunately it wasn't the case that ALL Thomkins were so-called for that reason. Many had fathers with a different forename and were presumably nicknamed Thomkin for other reasons. One likely reason might have been to distinguish them from other people, not necessarily related, also called Thomas. Medieval people used diminutive forms of forenames a great deal (and -kin was just one method for creating diminutives, others included adding -in, -un, -et, -ot, -el, and -cock), presumably because so few forenames were in use. When nearly everyone in the village was called John, Thomas, Richard or Robert it may have helped distinguish them if one was nicknamed Thom, another Thomkin, a third Thomlin, a fourth Thomcock, and so on. There are known cases of men with -kin forenames whose father did not have the same forename. In their Dictionary of English Surnames under Dickinson (which means 'son of Richard') Reaney and Wilson mention the case of John and Henry Dicounesson de Clenesse whose father was Richard son of Henry de Clenesse. But I'm fascinated to hear that you may have got back to the first person to be surnamed Tomkinson, and would love to hear more about it. Regards, Matt

There are various ages for different things when it comes to being a witness and being of age. A.J. Camp's book is fairly old now but very useful in describing these things. Audrey ----- Original Message ----- From: "Lyn Boothman" <[email protected]> To: "'Yvonne Purdy'" <[email protected]>; <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2007 8:58 PM Subject: Re: [OEL] Age to be a witness > Just catching up with emails - I've never seen anything definative but > I've > certainly seen people I know to be under 21 witness documents, and also > made > trustees as well in a couple of cases. Lyn B > > > > > > > > ==================================== > 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 > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

Just catching up with emails - I've never seen anything definative but I've certainly seen people I know to be under 21 witness documents, and also made trustees as well in a couple of cases. Lyn B

Hello Roy, Many thanks for your comments. I may have got to the first user of the name Tomkinson, and have several names in the area without surnames, who could be possible forebears. It struck me that I could looking for Tom, the son of Tom. Best regards, Don ----- Original Message ----- From: "Roy" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, January 27, 2007 10:34 PM Subject: Re: [OEL] KIN NAME SUFFIX > Evening Don - > > An interesting thought which may or may not have some substance when one > considers what 'kin' means! > > Reaney's dictionary of surnames lists "Tomkin" with 6 variants. One variant > "Tompkyn" is stated to be "Little Tom". > > It also lists "Tomkinson & Tompki[y]nson" and each case defines it as "Son > of Tomkin" > > Further on it lists "Tomlin" with 7 variants, one of which "Tomelyn" is > stated as a double diminutive of 'Tom or Thom' (Thomas). > > The supposition that the addition of "kin" to indicate "Junior" would there > fore seem to be about right, and so we would have Tom the father, Tomkin the > son and Tomkinson the grandson. QED? > > Kind Regards > Roy LD Cox > WEB: www.coxresearcher.com/index.htm > Member of the Somerset Archealogical & Natural History Society No. 1066 (And > All That!) http://www.sanhs.org > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Donald Tomkinson > Sent: 27 January 2007 19:56 > To: OLD ENGLISH MESSAGE > Subject: [OEL] KIN NAME SUFFIX > > The suffix "kin" in a name such as Tomkinson is described as a > diminutive, suggesting an affectionate connotation. Is it possible > that it might have been used in the present sense of the addition of > "Junior" after a name? Tomkinson would then be the "son of the son of > Tom", which seems to make sense. > > I should be glad to hear any opinions. > > Don Tomkinson > > > ==================================== > 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 > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > >