> but I am transcribing some letters that have some peculiar >little curliques on the end of, usually abbreviations or number dates, Dont forget its easy to add scans of the original problem words as a suppliment at the end possibly along with definitions of unusual words chris Glass Ruislip Uk

So when we see ffabolla written in a parish register that should be transcribed as Fabolla. There is no possible chance of faded ink or decaying vellum or paper disguised the fact that the intial letter had perished and that the ff was really preceded by an I revealing the name to be Iffabolla or as we would now say Isabella. It must be joy to only transcribe pristine records. ;-)) Cheers Guy -- Wakefield, England http://freespace.virgin.net/guy.etchells The site that gives you facts not promises! Archive CD Books have helped my research http://www.archivecdbooks.org http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~framland/CHURCH/church.htm Churches & MIs. in the Wakefield Area

In message <a04310104bc651ed70434@[216.114.174.246]>, Ruth Barton <mrgjb@sover.net> writes >It is all well and good to transcribe exactly what is written if you are >doing it by hand but I am transcribing some letters that have some peculiar >little curliques on the end of, usually abbreviations or number dates, >words that there are nothing even remotely resembling them on the >computer. So I just do the best I can. > >Now I have a question. What do you do if a word has been crossed out in a >letter? Put in in place within double brackets (( )) or { } brackets - as long as you explain at the front of your transcript what this means. Save square brackets [ ] for glosses, where the trasncriber adds some comment or remark. Just once in a blue moon, first thoughts were better thoughts or at least thoughts worth having -- Eve McLaughlin Author of the McLaughlin Guides for family historians Secretary Bucks Genealogical Society

In message <001e01c3fd35$00f731c0$3c759a8e@home>, Mary <murcon@allstream.net> writes >Hi Listers > My ancestors will mentions his son William to be Master of his >Majesties (looks like) Tents >Toyles Halls Pavillions. (I think they are T's ) >It appears that my ancestor Sir Wm. Bowles of St. James Clerkenwell, had >held the office previously . He speaks of submitting papers to the Lord >Commissioner, >Would this be a purchased office? yes. sounds like this was the way he hoped to get close to the royals, by organising their accommodation for entertainments, masques etc. Gratitude for a show well done could get you a knighthood and valuable monopolies, if the monarch was in a good mood. -- Eve McLaughlin Author of the McLaughlin Guides for family historians Secretary Bucks Genealogical Society

>Of course the "ff" was the capital F no one is disputing that, but what >is the transcriber's job? > >Is it to interpret the record and provide a modern translation or is it >to record what was written, what was written was a capital F. So that is what should be transcribed > we change the long s we should write is as s, which is not 'changing' but doing the job correctly >now that the common and accepted English usage was for John, >(from the latin & greek) but unfortunately our ancestors didn't always. Yes they did. It is modern folk who get it wrong -- Eve McLaughlin Author of the McLaughlin Guides for family historians Secretary Bucks Genealogical Society

I've no idea about what the rest of you do with crossed out writing but I transcribe it, if possible to read, put the transcription into square brackets and then put 'crossed through' against it after a colon, e.g. [his majestie: crossed through]. Audrey ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ruth Barton" <mrgjb@sover.net> To: <OLD-ENGLISH-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Friday, February 27, 2004 4:28 PM Subject: Re: [OEL] What do I do with that extra "f" > It is all well and good to transcribe exactly what is written if you are > doing it by hand but I am transcribing some letters that have some peculiar > little curliques on the end of, usually abbreviations or number dates, > words that there are nothing even remotely resembling them on the > computer. So I just do the best I can. > > Now I have a question. What do you do if a word has been crossed out in a > letter? I can't find any way to "line through" on my computer like I could > on a typewriter. Most of the crossed out material is just a botched word > or misspelling that he starts over and I just ignore it but don't know if > that's what I should do or not. Ruth > > > > > At 9:44 AM +0000 2/27/04, Guy Etchells wrote: > >Yes I agree the "ff" was used as a capital F but that was not the issue, > >the questioner did not ask what does "ff" mean. > > > >I believe a transcriber should copy what is written, that way there is > >one less chance of an error creeping in. > > > >Incidentally transcripts written exactly as the originals will have more > >clues to enable them to be read in twenty or thirty years time, when the > >pencil has faded, than transcripts where interpretation and common sense > >has been used. > >Cheers > >Guy > -- > Ruth Barton > mrgjb@sover.net > Dummerston, VT > > > ==== OLD-ENGLISH Mailing List ==== > THREADED archives for OLD-ENGLISH: > http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index?list=OLD-ENGLISH > >

Good Evening Ruth - If you are using any MS Word program there is a facility in the format/font menu which is called "STRIKETHROUGH" Notepad doesn't have any such formatting of course. MS WordPad has what is called "STRIKEOUT" obtainable from the same source format/font - MS Outlook also has the same facility but this is only available if you are composing in HTML. Outlook Express also. What you do is to go to the above facility and place a check mark in the box next to it and then close the facility, return to the document and continue typing. All text will then have a line through each character. You of course, only need one character to be affected so after typing it, return to the facility and uncheck the box. Voila! If you are using WordPerfect this also has I believe the same facility but not having used this program now for several years :- ) I do not know how to access it for sure, but it would be the same principle! Kind Regards June & Roy http://www.btinternet.com/~roy.cox/index.htm -----Original Message----- From: Ruth Barton [mailto:mrgjb@sover.net] Sent: Friday, February 27, 2004 4:28 PM To: OLD-ENGLISH-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [OEL] What do I do with that extra "f" It is all well and good to transcribe exactly what is written if you are doing it by hand but I am transcribing some letters that have some peculiar little curliques on the end of, usually abbreviations or number dates, words that there are nothing even remotely resembling them on the computer. So I just do the best I can. Now I have a question. What do you do if a word has been crossed out in a letter? I can't find any way to "line through" on my computer like I could on a typewriter. Most of the crossed out material is just a botched word or misspelling that he starts over and I just ignore it but don't know if that's what I should do or not. Ruth At 9:44 AM +0000 2/27/04, Guy Etchells wrote: >Yes I agree the "ff" was used as a capital F but that was not the >issue, the questioner did not ask what does "ff" mean. > >I believe a transcriber should copy what is written, that way there is >one less chance of an error creeping in. > >Incidentally transcripts written exactly as the originals will have >more clues to enable them to be read in twenty or thirty years time, >when the pencil has faded, than transcripts where interpretation and >common sense has been used. >Cheers >Guy -- Ruth Barton mrgjb@sover.net Dummerston, VT ==== OLD-ENGLISH Mailing List ==== THREADED archives for OLD-ENGLISH: http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index?list=OLD-ENGLISH

Hi Mary, Guy et al, I'm afraid I must disagree with Guy and agree with Polly. If you look at http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~oel/handwriting.html you will see that the capital F which just happens to look like ff is there amongst other capital F representations. It should be transcribed as F as this too is a representation of a capital F, but in a modern font. Just as the long s which just happens to look a bit like an f without the cross bar should be transcribed as s, as that is what was written. Cheers, Liz in Melbourne On Friday, February 27, 2004 5:03 AM, Guy Etchells [SMTP:guy.etchells@virgin.net] wrote: > You are transcribing it correctly put both "f"s in. > It is not the transcribers place to adapt the text to modern usage. > Cheers > Guy > > Mary Seal wrote: > > > I would like some advise please. For quite some time now I have been involved with transcribing parish registers and bishop's transcripts. The advise I was given in the beginning was to trascribe everything as is. (not the "s" which looks like "f" though. Consequently I have been writing Frances and February as they were originally written - ffrances and ffebruary. Now I am being told that I am putting in too many "f"s. > > > > So what do I do? Transcribe as it is written or leave off one of the "f"s? > > > > Regards..............Mary from Ottawa, Canada > >

Yes I agree the "ff" was used as a capital F but that was not the issue, the questioner did not ask what does "ff" mean. I believe a transcriber should copy what is written, that way there is one less chance of an error creeping in. Incidentally transcripts written exactly as the originals will have more clues to enable them to be read in twenty or thirty years time, when the pencil has faded, than transcripts where interpretation and common sense has been used. Cheers Guy Eve McLaughlin wrote: > In message <403E34BD.4000004@virgin.net>, Guy Etchells > <guy.etchells@virgin.net> writes > >>You are transcribing it correctly put both "f"s in. >>It is not the transcribers place to adapt the text to modern usage. > > but an ff IS a capital F. > So you consider that a WW should be written as uu, or rather Vu, because > that is how it was written? Next thing, you will be suggesting that the > long s should be written as a f, because it looks like one. Must use > common sense and not self conscious archaism > -- Wakefield, England http://freespace.virgin.net/guy.etchells The site that gives you facts not promises! http://www.archivecdbooks.org Producing over 1000 old books on CD to assist family historians http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~framland/framland/york.htm Yorkshire transcripts

Of course the "ff" was the capital F no one is disputing that, but what is the transcriber's job? Is it to interpret the record and provide a modern translation or is it to record what was written, leaving the interpretation to others? Can you be sure that the transcript is going to be legible in the future to distinguish the start letters etc.? Not so important if using a keyboard but imperative with hand written transcripts in pencil. Where do the changes end, do we change the long s and the various abbreviation marks or should a transcript be a faithful rendition of the original? If the transcriber decides that it acceptable to interpret the record what happens with abbreviations such as the notorious Jno. Yes we all know that the common and accepted English usage was for John, (from the latin & greek) but unfortunately our ancestors didn't always. No matter how many disagree, our ancestors, especially American ancestors sometimes used Jno as an abbreviation for Jonathan. In the end it comes down to personal preferences, I think faithfully copying is best practice, but do admit not to always following it myself. Cheers Guy Polly Rubery wrote: > Hi Guy > > >>>You are transcribing it correctly put both "f"s in. > > It is not the transcribers place to adapt the text to modern usage.<< > > While I would wholeheartedly agree with you, in this case the "old" usage is > a captial "F" which looks like a "ff" to us. So transcribing it as "ff" is > adapting it to modern usage! You only have to look at old alphabets > produced at the time to see that this is so. If you wish I'll send you a > scan. > Cheers > Polly > > -- Wakefield, England http://freespace.virgin.net/guy.etchells The site that gives you facts not promises! Help yourself, help archives, help others, with Archive CD Books http://www.archivecdbooks.org http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~framland/CHURCH/church.htm Churches & MIs. in the Wakefield Area

It is all well and good to transcribe exactly what is written if you are doing it by hand but I am transcribing some letters that have some peculiar little curliques on the end of, usually abbreviations or number dates, words that there are nothing even remotely resembling them on the computer. So I just do the best I can. Now I have a question. What do you do if a word has been crossed out in a letter? I can't find any way to "line through" on my computer like I could on a typewriter. Most of the crossed out material is just a botched word or misspelling that he starts over and I just ignore it but don't know if that's what I should do or not. Ruth At 9:44 AM +0000 2/27/04, Guy Etchells wrote: >Yes I agree the "ff" was used as a capital F but that was not the issue, >the questioner did not ask what does "ff" mean. > >I believe a transcriber should copy what is written, that way there is >one less chance of an error creeping in. > >Incidentally transcripts written exactly as the originals will have more >clues to enable them to be read in twenty or thirty years time, when the >pencil has faded, than transcripts where interpretation and common sense >has been used. >Cheers >Guy -- Ruth Barton mrgjb@sover.net Dummerston, VT

Hi Listers My ancestors will mentions his son William to be Master of his Majesties (looks like) Tents Toyles Halls Pavillions. (I think they are T's ) It appears that my ancestor Sir Wm. Bowles of St. James Clerkenwell, had held the office previously . He speaks of submitting papers to the Lord Commissioner, Would this be a purchased office? He mentions he paid out great sums of money. Any suggestions? Thanks Mary

Thank's to everyone who responded to my post on what to do the extra "f". My appologies in not replying to all. There were so many responses that I couldn't keep up with it. Many regards to all. A much appreciative..............Mary from Ottawa, Canada

In message <403E34BD.4000004@virgin.net>, Guy Etchells <guy.etchells@virgin.net> writes >You are transcribing it correctly put both "f"s in. >It is not the transcribers place to adapt the text to modern usage. but an ff IS a capital F. So you consider that a WW should be written as uu, or rather Vu, because that is how it was written? Next thing, you will be suggesting that the long s should be written as a f, because it looks like one. Must use common sense and not self conscious archaism -- Eve McLaughlin Author of the McLaughlin Guides for family historians Secretary Bucks Genealogical Society

In message <001301c3fc87$a8390700$64e9fc3e@oemcomputer>, "norman.lee1" <norman.lee1@virgin.net> writes >Hello there Mary > >I have a feeling that someone will disagree with me but most people I know >transcribe ff as F. ff was the way of writing a capital. absolutely correct - using a doubled ff in spelling a name (even a person's own name) is evidence of acquiring education late. u and v > These two letters present >different problems and there is more than one school of thought concerning >their transcription. u and v are often presented in documents as appearing >to be the same letter In general, the v formation is used at the beginning of words and the u formation in the centre, regardless of modern differentiation, and it is sensible to transcribe then with that in mind. >. Many people transcribe all of these as u, regardless >of whether any of us would pronounce them as a u. For instance, I don't like that - again, it shows lack of comprehension > I can't >think of anyone who would pronounce an underground chamber as 'caue' and >most people would call it a 'cave'. However, there is a school of thought >that would not alter the word caue to cave. but it isn't 'alteration', just using what the original writer intended to convey -- Eve McLaughlin Author of the McLaughlin Guides for family historians Secretary Bucks Genealogical Society

Hi Guy >>You are transcribing it correctly put both "f"s in. It is not the transcribers place to adapt the text to modern usage.<< While I would wholeheartedly agree with you, in this case the "old" usage is a captial "F" which looks like a "ff" to us. So transcribing it as "ff" is adapting it to modern usage! You only have to look at old alphabets produced at the time to see that this is so. If you wish I'll send you a scan. Cheers Polly

Forgot the list again in my eagerness!!! Kind Regards June & Roy http://www.btinternet.com/~roy.cox/index.htm -----Original Message----- From: Roy [mailto:roy.cox@btinternet.com] Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2004 8:50 PM To: 'norman.lee1' Subject: RE: [OEL] What do I do with that extra "f" Good Evening on this snowy day in some parts - Sunny in others one hopes? Its almost as though someone were using some form of "Olde Abbreviation" in these olde documents isn't it? But methinks there to be a more sequential reason for the apparent use of two similar letters or even an 'sf' etc., What I mean is, the evolution of the English language, prior to the Conquest my Middle English Handbook tells me, that the alphabet used, consisted of 25 letters of which only 20 are the same as those in use today. These continued in use by the scribes after the Conquest until the end of the 14th century when there were 27 letters in use of which two were about to "Disappear". After the close of the 14th century a norm tended to be established. The greater part of this period, manuscripts were frequently copied by one or more scribes, speaking a different dialect from that of the text they were copying. I think the supposition here is apparent, which the book carries on to explore, but my 'ole fingers would not be able to copy! I would have liked to have been able to produce a copy of this olde alphabet but there is not a font to support it and although some letters are the same it would not look right, not to reproduce it in its entirety. One thing stands out though, there are hardly any duplications like 'ff' which questions "At about what period did this duplication make itself apparent"? I wholeheartedly agree with everything that has been said so far, and even more so to transcribe "AS IS" and not ones' interpretation which would lead to a different construction of the document's sense. Whilst writing I would like to thank everyone who "Had-a-go" at John Chew's Will and Inventory which I have now copied and from all your kind efforts and passed on to my elderly cousin in North Carolina. I have also been able link some genealogy with the will as a result. Kind Regards and keep warm or cool wherever! June & Roy http://www.btinternet.com/~roy.cox/index.htm -----Original Message----- From: norman.lee1 [mailto:norman.lee1@virgin.net] Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2004 4:42 PM To: OLD-ENGLISH-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [OEL] What do I do with that extra "f" Hello there Mary I have a feeling that someone will disagree with me but most people I know transcribe ff as F. ff was the way of writing a capital. A number of letters have different forms for their capitals and you can get used to these. s/S is one of them. In fact there are about three different forms of s. R/r is another that has different forms. Then there's b/B, sometimes d/D, e/E, and many of the other letters of the alphabet. I have a feeling that there's a web site that will help you with these different forms. It's worth getting something you can print out to have by you as you transcribe. You also have to come to terms with how to transcribe u and i. These two letters present different problems and there is more than one school of thought concerning their transcription. u and v are often presented in documents as appearing to be the same letter. Many people transcribe all of these as u, regardless of whether any of us would pronounce them as a u. For instance, I can't think of anyone who would pronounce an underground chamber as 'caue' and most people would call it a 'cave'. However, there is a school of thought that would not alter the word caue to cave. You have to take your pick on this one. Equally, at one time there was not such a letter as j/J. They were all written as i/I but I can't imagine anyone actually pronouncing enioy rather than enjoy. I do know that there is a course on-line for palaeography. Someone on the list may well give you the reference for that one but if not, then key it into Google and I am sure you will find a good one. Good luck with your efforts. Audrey ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mary Seal" <mseal@sympatico.ca> To: <OLD-ENGLISH-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2004 12:37 PM Subject: [OEL] What do I do with that extra "f" > I would like some advise please. For quite some time now I have been involved with transcribing parish registers and bishop's transcripts. The advise I was given in the beginning was to trascribe everything as is. (not the "s" which looks like "f" though. Consequently I have been writing Frances and February as they were originally written - ffrances and ffebruary. Now I am being told that I am putting in too many "f"s. > > So what do I do? Transcribe as it is written or leave off one of the "f"s? > > Regards..............Mary from Ottawa, Canada > > > ==== OLD-ENGLISH Mailing List ==== > Going away for a while? > Don't forget to UNSUBSCRIBE! > OLD-ENGLISH-L-request@rootsweb.com > > ==== OLD-ENGLISH Mailing List ==== OLD-ENGLISH Web Page http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~oel/

In message <007101c3fb33$bf6866a0$db9f883e@escom>, "J.C.Christopher Glass" <chris@jccglass.fsnet.co.uk> writes >Hi can any one come up with an alternative to what seems >like it should read >"living on Means" >except to me it look more like Waerns Capital letter are often blessed with curly extensions - and W and M are very simnilar letters, if you strip the curls off. So, yes, living on means, the person had a private income, possibly from shares rather than houses or land -- Eve McLaughlin Author of the McLaughlin Guides for family historians Secretary Bucks Genealogical Society

You are transcribing it correctly put both "f"s in. It is not the transcribers place to adapt the text to modern usage. Cheers Guy Mary Seal wrote: > I would like some advise please. For quite some time now I have been involved with transcribing parish registers and bishop's transcripts. The advise I was given in the beginning was to trascribe everything as is. (not the "s" which looks like "f" though. Consequently I have been writing Frances and February as they were originally written - ffrances and ffebruary. Now I am being told that I am putting in too many "f"s. > > So what do I do? Transcribe as it is written or leave off one of the "f"s? > > Regards..............Mary from Ottawa, Canada > > > ==== OLD-ENGLISH Mailing List ==== > Going away for a while? > Don't forget to UNSUBSCRIBE! > OLD-ENGLISH-L-request@rootsweb.com > > -- Wakefield, England http://freespace.virgin.net/guy.etchells The site that gives you facts not promises! I use CDs produced by Archive CD Books to assist fellow researchers http://www.archivecdbooks.org http://www.framland.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/ Worldwide Cemetery Links, Monumental Inscriptions, War Graves, etc.

Hello there Mary I have a feeling that someone will disagree with me but most people I know transcribe ff as F. ff was the way of writing a capital. A number of letters have different forms for their capitals and you can get used to these. s/S is one of them. In fact there are about three different forms of s. R/r is another that has different forms. Then there's b/B, sometimes d/D, e/E, and many of the other letters of the alphabet. I have a feeling that there's a web site that will help you with these different forms. It's worth getting something you can print out to have by you as you transcribe. You also have to come to terms with how to transcribe u and i. These two letters present different problems and there is more than one school of thought concerning their transcription. u and v are often presented in documents as appearing to be the same letter. Many people transcribe all of these as u, regardless of whether any of us would pronounce them as a u. For instance, I can't think of anyone who would pronounce an underground chamber as 'caue' and most people would call it a 'cave'. However, there is a school of thought that would not alter the word caue to cave. You have to take your pick on this one. Equally, at one time there was not such a letter as j/J. They were all written as i/I but I can't imagine anyone actually pronouncing enioy rather than enjoy. I do know that there is a course on-line for palaeography. Someone on the list may well give you the reference for that one but if not, then key it into Google and I am sure you will find a good one. Good luck with your efforts. Audrey ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mary Seal" <mseal@sympatico.ca> To: <OLD-ENGLISH-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2004 12:37 PM Subject: [OEL] What do I do with that extra "f" > I would like some advise please. For quite some time now I have been involved with transcribing parish registers and bishop's transcripts. The advise I was given in the beginning was to trascribe everything as is. (not the "s" which looks like "f" though. Consequently I have been writing Frances and February as they were originally written - ffrances and ffebruary. Now I am being told that I am putting in too many "f"s. > > So what do I do? Transcribe as it is written or leave off one of the "f"s? > > Regards..............Mary from Ottawa, Canada > > > ==== OLD-ENGLISH Mailing List ==== > Going away for a while? > Don't forget to UNSUBSCRIBE! > OLD-ENGLISH-L-request@rootsweb.com > >