John: > "CHURCHING OF WOMEN: A ceremony of thanksgiving for a safe delivery > performed at the altar rails after the baptism of a child. Was grossly > associated with superstition and believed (erroneously) to be a rite of > purification. The bracketed "erroneously" in this quote is erroneous. Leviticus 12 shows the Biblical origins of churching, and refers clearly to the purification of women after childbirth. Here's the Revised Standard Version. 1 The LORD said to Moses, 2 "Say to the people of Israel, If a woman conceives, and bears a male child, then she shall be unclean seven days; as at the time of her menstruation, she shall be unclean. 3 And on the eighth day the flesh of his foreskin shall be circumcised. 4 Then she shall continue for thirty-three days in the blood of her purifying; she shall not touch any hallowed thing, nor come into the sanctuary, until the days of her purifying are completed. 5 But if she bears a female child, then she shall be unclean two weeks, as in her menstruation; and she shall continue in the blood of her purifying for sixty-six days. 6 "And when the days of her purifying are completed, whether for a son or for a daughter, she shall bring to the priest at the door of the tent of meeting a lamb a year old for a burnt offering, and a young pigeon or a turtledove for a sin offering , 7 and he shall offer it before the LORD, and make atonement for her; then she shall be clean from the flow of her blood. This is the law for her who bears a child, either male or female. 8 And if she cannot afford a lamb, then she shall take two turtledoves or two young pigeons, one for a burnt offering and the other for a sin offering; and the priest shall make atonement for her, and she shall be clean." I understand that the modern churching ceremony is not concerned with purification and focuses on the obvious positive aspects of childbirth. All well and good. But to deny its origins is to re-write history. Best wishes Paul Prescott --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.721 / Virus Database: 477 - Release Date: 16-07-2004

Date of baptism > seems to have been seven days after birth. This varied very much from place to place, In towns, it was obviously wiser to do it fast, before the baby caught whatever fever was going, and 3-4 days is found in London. In healthier country areas, 3 weeks has worked out to be more usual, with four weeks or a full month in other places/ Some clergy got sniffy if it was delayed much longer- 'this child above a quarter yr old' =-for instance. The gentry often did delay longer, to gather the clans together, but this is rarely commented on adversely. On the other hand, in some areas, the gentry, and then the rich farmers, tended to send for the clergyman to do a private baptism, as a matter of habit, not need, within a week or so of birth, then have a public do a few months later. -- Eve McLaughlin Author of the McLaughlin Guides for family historians Secretary Bucks Genealogical Society

In message <4106CA72.8080105@cablelynx.com>, W H F Meeks <meeksmerge@cablelynx.com> writes >I am sure my question has been answered many times but not since I have >been on list. > >In 1524, in Northamptonshire England, my 10 great grandfather, Thomas >Beauchamp, his brother John and a Richard Beauchamp were on the tax >rolls at Cosgrave, Northamptonshire. DeBrett Ancestral Research says >that Richard was "probably" the father of John and Thomas but no proof. >I am trying to determine the age of Thomas. At that time, at what age >was one placed on the tax rolls? Thanks for any assistance. It doesm't work like that. If you are talking about the Subsidy of 1524, it was the possession of property which determined whether the subsidy was collected. Normally, a son would have to wait till Daddy was dead, or at least until he acquired property by marriage. There were special circumstances in 1524. A year or so earlier. the King had asked for patriotic help in waging a possible war against France, always a popular thing. He asked a 'Muster' for details or armour and weapons and -kind of incidentally - how much people were worth in lands and goods. They fell for it and some even boasted. Next year, a subsidy was raised assessed on these figures, and anyone with 50 pounds value or more paid a lot extra. So, quick shuffle, put some of the estate in your sons' names, to get it below 50. In this case then, the sons could be even under 21, Possibly, your searcher is comparing the Muster list with the actual Subsidy list. -- Eve McLaughlin Author of the McLaughlin Guides for family historians Secretary Bucks Genealogical Society

Thanks for the detailed explaination on the tax rolls, etc. DeBrett did use the Lay Subsidy rolls, muster rolls, pipe rolls and close rolls among other items. Of the three Beauchamps mentioned, Thomas appeared on the tax rolls of 1543/4, he left a will in 1545, John died with a will in 1536 and there was no further record on Richard. I suppose that Thomas was older than I originally thought. Thanks so much for your input. WHF Eve McLaughlin wrote: >In message <4106CA72.8080105@cablelynx.com>, W H F Meeks ><meeksmerge@cablelynx.com> writes > > >>I am sure my question has been answered many times but not since I have >>been on list. >> >>In 1524, in Northamptonshire England, my 10 great grandfather, Thomas >>Beauchamp, his brother John and a Richard Beauchamp were on the tax >>rolls at Cosgrave, Northamptonshire. DeBrett Ancestral Research says >>that Richard was "probably" the father of John and Thomas but no proof. >>I am trying to determine the age of Thomas. At that time, at what age >>was one placed on the tax rolls? Thanks for any assistance. >> >> >It doesm't work like that. >If you are talking about the Subsidy of 1524, it was the possession of >property which determined whether the subsidy was collected. Normally, >a son would have to wait till Daddy was dead, or at least until he >acquired property by marriage. There were special circumstances in 1524. >A year or so earlier. the King had asked for patriotic help in waging a >possible war against France, always a popular thing. He asked a 'Muster' >for details or armour and weapons and -kind of incidentally - how much >people were worth in lands and goods. They fell for it and some even >boasted. Next year, a subsidy was raised assessed on these figures, and >anyone with 50 pounds value or more paid a lot extra. So, quick shuffle, >put some of the estate in your sons' names, to get it below 50. In this >case then, the sons could be even under 21, > Possibly, your searcher is comparing the Muster list with the actual >Subsidy list. > >

Thanks Ian. I don't really know anything about the Celts. Am I right in saying that they weren't the original inhabitants of the British Isles? Do you know when they came and how they spread throughout and where they originated? Audrey ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ian Buckley" <Ianbuckley@uko2.co.uk> To: <OLD-ENGLISH-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2004 11:22 AM Subject: Re: [OEL] Re: Ac > ... Why are these names so prolific > in one particular part of France? Why not in the north or the east for > instance? What was/is different about the south west? > > You have to bear in mind that there was no unified Celtic language spoken > throughout what we now call France. We do better to think of a constellation > of dialects with as many local differences as now exist between Welsh and > Cornish and Breton, or between Irish, Scots Gaelic and Manx. > IB > > > ==== OLD-ENGLISH Mailing List ==== > OLD-ENGLISH Web Page > http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~oel/ > >

In message <007b01c4739f$14c537c0$6cf1a1cd@pcpowerhrhqxek>, Gordon Barlow <barlow@candw.ky> writes >Googling for details of the churching ("purification" - yes, really!) of women >after childbirth*** I came across a report that in 17th-Century England - or >maybe Britain - midwives had "quasi-clerical" authority to baptize newly born >babies if they seemed about to die. This did happen and was the reason why midwives had to be licensed by the Bishop. The idea was that the baby would be received into church later, if it survived. The infant could be 'named' as Creatura, a creature of god, failing a family name's being offered > Would such baptisms have been recorded in >the Parish Registers? if the vicar chose to do so. -- Eve McLaughlin Author of the McLaughlin Guides for family historians Secretary Bucks Genealogical Society

I am sure my question has been answered many times but not since I have been on list. In 1524, in Northamptonshire England, my 10 great grandfather, Thomas Beauchamp, his brother John and a Richard Beauchamp were on the tax rolls at Cosgrave, Northamptonshire. DeBrett Ancestral Research says that Richard was "probably" the father of John and Thomas but no proof. I am trying to determine the age of Thomas. At that time, at what age was one placed on the tax rolls? Thanks for any assistance. WHF Meeks

... Why are these names so prolific in one particular part of France? Why not in the north or the east for instance? What was/is different about the south west? You have to bear in mind that there was no unified Celtic language spoken throughout what we now call France. We do better to think of a constellation of dialects with as many local differences as now exist between Welsh and Cornish and Breton, or between Irish, Scots Gaelic and Manx. IB

Baptism does not have to be done by a priest or deacon. Anyone can do it in an emergency. The situation you describe was thought to be an emergency because unbaptized babies were bound to end up in hell! Baptism also can only be done once so if the baby survived and there is a second baptism in church the priest has to say some thing like N, if you are not already baptized I baptize you ...... I have seen register entries for babies baptized privately (ie at home) and then baptized in church: but in the end it will depend on whether the midwife told the vicar - and then on whether he remembered to enter it in the register. It seems that clergy often kept rough notes and then wrote then up in batches. Christopher Richards ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gordon Barlow" <barlow@candw.ky> To: <OLD-ENGLISH-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2004 6:59 AM Subject: [OEL] baptisms by midwives > Googling for details of the churching ("purification" - yes, really!) of women after childbirth*** I came across a report that in 17th-Century England - or maybe Britain - midwives had "quasi-clerical" authority to baptize newly born babies if they seemed about to die. Would such baptisms have been recorded in the Parish Registers? And, if the babies lived would they have been obliged to be baptized again in church? If there was no such obligation, and no other recording, that might explain why some baptisms are missing. Am I on the right track here? > > *** When was churching abolished in the civilised world, by the way? I seem to recall reading that the Orthodox Churches still observe the practice: could that be correct? Seems a bit primitive, in these days of (Western) respect for women. > > Gordon Barlow > > > ==== OLD-ENGLISH Mailing List ==== > OLD-ENGLISH Web Page > http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~oel/ > > >

Hi Folks Could you please bear with me. I'm just testing to see if my mail is really outgoing or just lands up in the sent box without actually going anywhere. Audrey

Googling for details of the churching ("purification" - yes, really!) of women after childbirth*** I came across a report that in 17th-Century England - or maybe Britain - midwives had "quasi-clerical" authority to baptize newly born babies if they seemed about to die. Would such baptisms have been recorded in the Parish Registers? And, if the babies lived would they have been obliged to be baptized again in church? If there was no such obligation, and no other recording, that might explain why some baptisms are missing. Am I on the right track here? *** When was churching abolished in the civilised world, by the way? I seem to recall reading that the Orthodox Churches still observe the practice: could that be correct? Seems a bit primitive, in these days of (Western) respect for women. Gordon Barlow

A history book I am reading mentions Lundy (Island), the Scillies and the Orkneys as being shelters for pirates in the early 1600s. "Dunkirk pirates made English waters unsafe. The Barbary corsairs raided the Devon & Cornish coasts and those of southern Ireland. The slave-markets of Africa knew the boys and girls of Plymouth, Barnstaple and (Irish) Baltimore." Well, we dealt with the topic of pirates a year or so back, and most general history books quote from public documents about the abductees. But are there many incidental references in private Wills? "To my son Fred if he should ever return from the pirates, I bequeath..." or "One hundred pounds to be paid as ransom for the safe return of my daughter Mary, if ever an opportunity should arise..." - that sort of thing. The poorer victims would have been lost forever, I guess, and their parents left no Wills. But what about the testamentary classes? Gordon Barlow

Thank you very much David for acquiring the advice of the expert. Somehow I imagined that someone on our list would be able to help in some way. You know a man who can which is worth a tremendous amount. As for understanding the reply - I think it's sunk in, more or less. I am only left with one question and it is this. Why are these names so prolific in one particular part of France? Why not in the north or the east for instance? What was/is different about the south west? Presumably the names predate the ownership by the English of the Aquitaine? Is it possible to ask your friend again about this or have we presumed too much upon his time and/or his summer vacation? Audrey ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Pott" <davpott@hotmail.com> To: <OLD-ENGLISH-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Monday, July 26, 2004 12:14 AM Subject: Re: [OEL] Re: Ac > Listers, > I could see that the 'old English' that this thread was getting into was > beyond the ken of most of us so I enlisted the brains of one of our leading > place name etymologists. > Below are his thoughts. > > David Pott > > > Firstly, thank you (I think!) for forwarding the rather confused OEL thread. > I'm not sure quite how to unpick it, but here goes... > > There is no question of a connection between -ac and wic. > > (1) Regarding the former, Ian Buckley and his French correspondent seem to > me to have answered the question admirably and concisely, and we may > disregard the wilder speculations. We are dealing with an originally > adjectival suffix used to form place-names and river-names. The form in > British (i.e. the common Brittonic stage of Celtic language) is -ako- (with > a long a). As noted by Dr Buckley, a reflex of this appears in Welsh as -og. > It is there too in Cornish -ek. To the Continental examples already > mentioned could be added numerous place-names in Britian, such as York > (probably 'yew-tree place'), the first part of Berkshire ('hilly place'), > Cam Beck [river in Cumberland] and Cammock [hill in West Yorkshire] (both > 'crooked one'). For several useful references to fuller discussions see > Coates & Breeze (2000) 'Celtic Voices, English Places', p.354 s.v. -og. > > (2) As for the latter, Old English wic is of course a borrowing from Latin > vicus (both with long i), the key sense in both languages being 'specialized > area/settlement': in its earliest applications the Old English word appears > generally to be used in the sense 'trading post'. Other types of > specialization are perhaps discernable at various stages of the word's long > history, but I rather suspect that an element of trade underlies them all. > The notion that all the place-names in England which have hitherto be > explained as containing wic are actually reformations of earlier names > in -ako- is far-fetched. We have ample early documentation which absolutely > precludes this. Such a development is not in itself impossible or even > implausible, at least in an individual case or two (indeed the development > of York from Ebur(o)-ako- via a pseudo-Old English form Eoforwic > demonstrates precisely this reanalysis), but cannot be taken as feasible > across the board. It could never account for wic as a first element in > compounds such as Wickham, or as a simplex name Wick, nor could it account > for the palatal form of names like Sandwich, Fordwich, and Harwich. > > Hope that was more of a help than a hindrance, > All the best > Paul > > > Dr Paul Cullen > Institute for Name-Studies > School of English Studies > University of Nottingham > > > > > Nevertheless, one can entertain the possibility that every -wick name in > > England was once a -ck place-name indicator, in the time before the Latin > > renaming of such places. It is at least reasonable to propose that the > > Latin word was a variant of another Indo-European word carrying the same > > meaning. (And if not a variant of a such a word, what was the origin of > the > > Latin?) Also, what word or suffix did the British or Irish Celts use as a > > place-indicator? > > > ==== OLD-ENGLISH Mailing List ==== > To contact the list administrator: > OLD-ENGLISH-admin@rootsweb.com > >

Listers, I could see that the 'old English' that this thread was getting into was beyond the ken of most of us so I enlisted the brains of one of our leading place name etymologists. Below are his thoughts. David Pott Firstly, thank you (I think!) for forwarding the rather confused OEL thread. I'm not sure quite how to unpick it, but here goes... There is no question of a connection between -ac and wic. (1) Regarding the former, Ian Buckley and his French correspondent seem to me to have answered the question admirably and concisely, and we may disregard the wilder speculations. We are dealing with an originally adjectival suffix used to form place-names and river-names. The form in British (i.e. the common Brittonic stage of Celtic language) is -ako- (with a long a). As noted by Dr Buckley, a reflex of this appears in Welsh as -og. It is there too in Cornish -ek. To the Continental examples already mentioned could be added numerous place-names in Britian, such as York (probably 'yew-tree place'), the first part of Berkshire ('hilly place'), Cam Beck [river in Cumberland] and Cammock [hill in West Yorkshire] (both 'crooked one'). For several useful references to fuller discussions see Coates & Breeze (2000) 'Celtic Voices, English Places', p.354 s.v. -og. (2) As for the latter, Old English wic is of course a borrowing from Latin vicus (both with long i), the key sense in both languages being 'specialized area/settlement': in its earliest applications the Old English word appears generally to be used in the sense 'trading post'. Other types of specialization are perhaps discernable at various stages of the word's long history, but I rather suspect that an element of trade underlies them all. The notion that all the place-names in England which have hitherto be explained as containing wic are actually reformations of earlier names in -ako- is far-fetched. We have ample early documentation which absolutely precludes this. Such a development is not in itself impossible or even implausible, at least in an individual case or two (indeed the development of York from Ebur(o)-ako- via a pseudo-Old English form Eoforwic demonstrates precisely this reanalysis), but cannot be taken as feasible across the board. It could never account for wic as a first element in compounds such as Wickham, or as a simplex name Wick, nor could it account for the palatal form of names like Sandwich, Fordwich, and Harwich. Hope that was more of a help than a hindrance, All the best Paul Dr Paul Cullen Institute for Name-Studies School of English Studies University of Nottingham > Nevertheless, one can entertain the possibility that every -wick name in > England was once a -ck place-name indicator, in the time before the Latin > renaming of such places. It is at least reasonable to propose that the > Latin word was a variant of another Indo-European word carrying the same > meaning. (And if not a variant of a such a word, what was the origin of the > Latin?) Also, what word or suffix did the British or Irish Celts use as a > place-indicator?

In message <010601c471d1$52c59300$37d0fc3e@oemcomputer>, "norman.lee1" <norman.lee1@virgin.net> writes >I've only just been able to pick this message up. Can I make a suggestion >and ask a question at the same time? Isn't a cross bolt just another word >for the arrow sent in a cross bow? A bolt is another word for an arrow, >isn't it, or sometimes a dart? I think the original query referred to a legacy or inventory, something left in a will - more likely to be the bow, than a single bolt or arrow. If it had been plrual, the alternative might be feasible. -- Eve McLaughlin Author of the McLaughlin Guides for family historians Secretary Bucks Genealogical Society

Hi Audrey, Given that the letter writer was looking for crow quills, this could perhaps have been a reference to the frigate bird. The term man of war was also applied to the albatross and to the skua. Those three at least would have had reasonably large feathers, somewhat lacking in a jelly fish. :-)) The Portugese man-of-war was so called because it floats on the surface of the sea with a sail-like crest displayed. Liz in Melbourne Quoting "norman.lee1" <norman.lee1@virgin.net>: > Don't know if this is any help at all but there is a type of jelly fish > called 'Portuguese man of war'. It could be that there other 'men of war' in > other parts of nature. I've no idea why these jelly fish are so called, only > that they are very poisonous and you have to avoid touching them. > > Audrey > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "E & R Shanahan" <ears@gil.com.au> > To: <OLD-ENGLISH-L@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 12:43 AM > Subject: [OEL] quill pens query > > > > Here is a good question for the list members... > > We have just bought a letter of 1806, written from Carnock Manse in > > Scotland to a brother in Edinburgh, and it includes this intriguing > sentence > > > > quote > > We have had pretty good weather and the harvest is just about beginning. > > We are traversing the hills every day seeking Crow quills but can find no > > Men O' War, but plenty of small. > > unquote > > > > Does anyone know of this kind of designation for quills - was there a > > general standard for sizing them? We had not realised that crow quills > > would have been used, as most mentions we have seen are to goose quills, > > but suppose that any good large feather would provide a source for a pen. > > > > any information appreciated > > Eunice and Ron in Queensland > >

Hi Liz Thanks a lot for this info. I have to say that the only examples of the jelly fish were floating on the edge of the tide off the coast of Kent. I don't remember the sail-like fin. It was more the purple-veined tentacles that distinguished them from the clear jelly-like blobs of the common ones that used to appear after a stormy night, stranded on the tide-line. We were always told not to touch them and became quite frightened as they could wash against your legs if you didn't spot them first. I can't say that I like jelly-fish, full stop. Even the blobs could sting a bit, rather like a stinging nettle. Why Portuguese? Possibly they were supposed to come from that country and had travelled up from the Bay of Biscay, the seat of many a storm? Perhaps they breed off the the Portuguese coast? So it would seem that the quills of the men of war belonged to the vicious sea birds that may have congregated around the moors near the Scottish coast. I believe that skuas can be quite nasty when disturbed and those looking for the crow quills may have had to endure a few attacks from them. It would seem that the crow quills were preferred to the others though. I'd have thought that they would have been fairly prolific, if you include rooks with the other types of crow, and jackdaws - all in the crow family. Audrey ----- Original Message ----- From: <emagar@hotkey.net.au> To: <OLD-ENGLISH-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Sunday, July 25, 2004 7:52 AM Subject: Re: [OEL] quill pens query > Hi Audrey, > > Given that the letter writer was looking for crow quills, this could perhaps > have been a reference to the frigate bird. The term man of war was also > applied to the albatross and to the skua. Those three at least would have > had reasonably large feathers, somewhat lacking in a jelly fish. :-)) > > The Portugese man-of-war was so called because it floats on the surface of > the sea with a sail-like crest displayed. > > Liz in Melbourne > > Quoting "norman.lee1" <norman.lee1@virgin.net>: > > > Don't know if this is any help at all but there is a type of jelly fish > > called 'Portuguese man of war'. It could be that there other 'men of war' in > > other parts of nature. I've no idea why these jelly fish are so called, only > > that they are very poisonous and you have to avoid touching them. > > > > Audrey > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "E & R Shanahan" <ears@gil.com.au> > > To: <OLD-ENGLISH-L@rootsweb.com> > > Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 12:43 AM > > Subject: [OEL] quill pens query > > > > > > > Here is a good question for the list members... > > > We have just bought a letter of 1806, written from Carnock Manse in > > > Scotland to a brother in Edinburgh, and it includes this intriguing > > sentence > > > > > > quote > > > We have had pretty good weather and the harvest is just about beginning. > > > We are traversing the hills every day seeking Crow quills but can find no > > > Men O' War, but plenty of small. > > > unquote > > > > > > Does anyone know of this kind of designation for quills - was there a > > > general standard for sizing them? We had not realised that crow quills > > > would have been used, as most mentions we have seen are to goose quills, > > > but suppose that any good large feather would provide a source for a pen. > > > > > > any information appreciated > > > Eunice and Ron in Queensland > > > > > > ==== OLD-ENGLISH Mailing List ==== > OLD-ENGLISH Web Page > http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~oel/ > >

I imagine 'et ei [ejus] affignate [assignate]' would be 'and his/their assign/s' John Barton ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rhonda Thompson" <rhonda11555@optushome.com.au> To: <OLD-ENGLISH-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Saturday, July 24, 2004 6:25 PM Subject: [OEL] Latin Translation > Hi all, > > I have never posted to this list but do enjoy reading it. However, due > to my total lack of Latin, except when it refers to BDMs, I hoped > someone might be able to translate the following. It is from Nash: > Collections for the History of Worcestershire: 1781-1782. > > This is the passage: > > The Lords of Acton Beauchamp have always been Patrons of the Rectory > there are no arms nor monuments of note. > > In the first column: > > Johannes Fyncher de Shelve ratione advocations Will Berkeley de > Cotheridge, Nathaniel Brooke, cl. facte, et ei affignate. > > In the second column: > > Georgius Ffyncher, cl. 29 Maii, 1600 R.33.f.19.a > > If anyone could explain the first sentence (the one in English) it would > be helpful also. I know that Nathaniel BROOKE and George FINCHER were > Rectors of Acton Beauchamp. I also know that most of you will be > reading this thinking "is this woman thick?" The answer being, > "somewhat", but this is my first venture into Nash and I freak out when > Parish Registers are in Latin, although I usually manage. However, I am > trying to branch out into other sources where I might find valuable > information. > > Any help at all will be greatly appreciated. > > Regards, > > Rhonda Thompson, > Sydney, Australia > > > > ==== OLD-ENGLISH Mailing List ==== > OLD-ENGLISH Web Page > http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~oel/ > >

In message <410200C1.2060103@optushome.com.au>, Rhonda Thompson <rhonda11555@optushome.com.au> writes >Hi all, > >I have never posted to this list but do enjoy reading it. However, due >to my total lack of Latin, except when it refers to BDMs, I hoped >someone might be able to translate the following. It is from Nash: >Collections for the History of Worcestershire: 1781-1782. > >This is the passage: > >The Lords of Acton Beauchamp have always been Patrons of the Rectory The owners of the manor of Acton Beauchamp have always had the right to nominate the rector of the parish (who would then be approved by the Bishop (a rubber stamp affair) and duly instituted >there are no arms nor monuments of note. You woulkd rather expect there to be some fine tombs and armorial brasses in the church, (or churchyard) but there is nothing that matters, so presumably the Lords were generally non-resident. > >In the first column: > >Johannes Fyncher de Shelve ratione advocations Will Berkeley de >Cotheridge, Nathaniel Brooke, cl. facte, et ei affignate. John Fincher of Shelf, [prob]/ by advice or at suggestion of his lawyer [advocationis] (or counsellor/trustee, maybe because he was under age) Wm Berkeley of Cotheridge made (rector) Nathaniel Brooke and by his assigns > >In the second column: > >Georgius Ffyncher, cl. 29 Maii, 1600 R.33.f.19.a George Fincher, clergyman, on 29 May 1600 (rest of ref must apply to this book or to another book as described in the list of abbreviations.) > -- Eve McLaughlin Author of the McLaughlin Guides for family historians Secretary Bucks Genealogical Society

Don't know if this is any help at all but there is a type of jelly fish called 'Portuguese man of war'. It could be that there other 'men of war' in other parts of nature. I've no idea why these jelly fish are so called, only that they are very poisonous and you have to avoid touching them. Audrey ----- Original Message ----- From: "E & R Shanahan" <ears@gil.com.au> To: <OLD-ENGLISH-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 12:43 AM Subject: [OEL] quill pens query > Here is a good question for the list members... > We have just bought a letter of 1806, written from Carnock Manse in > Scotland to a brother in Edinburgh, and it includes this intriguing sentence > > quote > We have had pretty good weather and the harvest is just about beginning. > We are traversing the hills every day seeking Crow quills but can find no > Men O' War, but plenty of small. > unquote > > Does anyone know of this kind of designation for quills - was there a > general standard for sizing them? We had not realised that crow quills > would have been used, as most mentions we have seen are to goose quills, > but suppose that any good large feather would provide a source for a pen. > > any information appreciated > Eunice and Ron in Queensland > > > ==== OLD-ENGLISH Mailing List ==== > Going away for a while? > Don't forget to UNSUBSCRIBE! > OLD-ENGLISH-L-request@rootsweb.com > >