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

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