In the Suffolk Feet of Fines (35 Henry III, p 54) the above phrase
occurs in the following context:
"Bartholomew de Walsingham and Cecilia his wife, and her sister
Margaret v. Walter Gaugy and Alice his wife in Polstead (Alice
daughter of Cecilia and Hugh de Polsted appon' clam')."
Could some kind soul confirm the likely meaning of appon' clam' in
this context? I presume it means that Alice de Polsted was added as a
party to the transaction, and that she was therefore a distinct
individual to Alice wife of Walter Gaugy.
MA-R
Meaning of: appon' clam'
Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper
-
pj.evans
Re: Meaning of: appon' clam'
On Jun 25, 2:54 pm, m...@btinternet.com wrote:
WAG: could it mean that Alice was claimed to be the daughter of
Cecilia and Hugh de Polsted?
(I'm getting apponere and clamare as the roots here, and that's out of
a classical dictionary, so I could be way out in the weeds.)
In the Suffolk Feet of Fines (35 Henry III, p 54) the above phrase
occurs in the following context:
"Bartholomew de Walsingham and Cecilia his wife, and her sister
Margaret v. Walter Gaugy and Alice his wife in Polstead (Alice
daughter of Cecilia and Hugh de Polsted appon' clam')."
Could some kind soul confirm the likely meaning of appon' clam' in
this context? I presume it means that Alice de Polsted was added as a
party to the transaction, and that she was therefore a distinct
individual to Alice wife of Walter Gaugy.
MA-R
WAG: could it mean that Alice was claimed to be the daughter of
Cecilia and Hugh de Polsted?
(I'm getting apponere and clamare as the roots here, and that's out of
a classical dictionary, so I could be way out in the weeds.)
-
Peter Stewart
Re: Meaning of: appon' clam'
On Jun 26, 7:54 am, m...@btinternet.com wrote:
With the warning that I know nothing about legalese, I would guess
that this is short for "apponit clamium" (he/she stands by, supports
or joins in the claim).
Peter Stewart
In the Suffolk Feet of Fines (35 Henry III, p 54) the above phrase
occurs in the following context:
"Bartholomew de Walsingham and Cecilia his wife, and her sister
Margaret v. Walter Gaugy and Alice his wife in Polstead (Alice
daughter of Cecilia and Hugh de Polsted appon' clam')."
Could some kind soul confirm the likely meaning of appon' clam' in
this context? I presume it means that Alice de Polsted was added as a
party to the transaction, and that she was therefore a distinct
individual to Alice wife of Walter Gaugy.
With the warning that I know nothing about legalese, I would guess
that this is short for "apponit clamium" (he/she stands by, supports
or joins in the claim).
Peter Stewart
-
Rosie Bevan
Re: Meaning of: appon' clam'
The latter interpretation is nearest to the mark. It means literally
put in their claim. Until 1360 a final concord barred claims to
property of people who were not party to a fine and did not enter
their claim within a year and a day. The fine roll was endorsed in the
manner given by Michael, so that a person's stake in the land was
registered. After 1360 a statute removed this bar, and as this bar was
one of the attractions of the fine, the number subsequently decreased.
In the case of Hugh de Polsted, he was lord of the manor of Polstead,
but the reason for Alice's claim is not obvious to me.
Cheers
Rosie
On Jun 26, 2:52 pm, Peter Stewart <p_m_stew...@msn.com> wrote:
put in their claim. Until 1360 a final concord barred claims to
property of people who were not party to a fine and did not enter
their claim within a year and a day. The fine roll was endorsed in the
manner given by Michael, so that a person's stake in the land was
registered. After 1360 a statute removed this bar, and as this bar was
one of the attractions of the fine, the number subsequently decreased.
In the case of Hugh de Polsted, he was lord of the manor of Polstead,
but the reason for Alice's claim is not obvious to me.
Cheers
Rosie
On Jun 26, 2:52 pm, Peter Stewart <p_m_stew...@msn.com> wrote:
On Jun 26, 7:54 am, m...@btinternet.com wrote:
In the Suffolk Feet of Fines (35 Henry III, p 54) the above phrase
occurs in the following context:
"Bartholomew de Walsingham and Cecilia his wife, and her sister
Margaret v. Walter Gaugy and Alice his wife in Polstead (Alice
daughter of Cecilia and Hugh de Polsted appon' clam')."
Could some kind soul confirm the likely meaning of appon' clam' in
this context? I presume it means that Alice de Polsted was added as a
party to the transaction, and that she was therefore a distinct
individual to Alice wife of Walter Gaugy.
With the warning that I know nothing about legalese, I would guess
that this is short for "apponit clamium" (he/she stands by, supports
or joins in the claim).
Peter Stewart
-
Gjest
Re: Meaning of: appon' clam'
On 26 Jun., 05:59, Rosie Bevan <rbe...@paradise.net.nz> wrote:
Many thanks to each of you for your kind help - much appreciated.
Cheers, Michael
The latter interpretation is nearest to the mark. It means literally
put in their claim. Until 1360 a final concord barred claims to
property of people who were not party to a fine and did not enter
their claim within a year and a day. The fine roll was endorsed in the
manner given by Michael, so that a person's stake in the land was
registered. After 1360 a statute removed this bar, and as this bar was
one of the attractions of the fine, the number subsequently decreased.
In the case of Hugh de Polsted, he was lord of the manor of Polstead,
but the reason for Alice's claim is not obvious to me.
Cheers
Rosie
On Jun 26, 2:52 pm, Peter Stewart <p_m_stew...@msn.com> wrote:
On Jun 26, 7:54 am, m...@btinternet.com wrote:
In the Suffolk Feet of Fines (35 Henry III, p 54) the above phrase
occurs in the following context:
"Bartholomew de Walsingham and Cecilia his wife, and her sister
Margaret v. Walter Gaugy and Alice his wife in Polstead (Alice
daughter of Cecilia and Hugh de Polsted appon' clam')."
Could some kind soul confirm the likely meaning of appon' clam' in
this context? I presume it means that Alice de Polsted was added as a
party to the transaction, and that she was therefore a distinct
individual to Alice wife of Walter Gaugy.
With the warning that I know nothing about legalese, I would guess
that this is short for "apponit clamium" (he/she stands by, supports
or joins in the claim).
Peter Stewart
Many thanks to each of you for your kind help - much appreciated.
Cheers, Michael
-
Peter Stewart
Re: Meaning of: appon' clam'
Thanks Rosie, there's no substitute for expertise, least of all in
guesswork.
If the expansion "apponit clamium" is right, I suppose a translation
in this context - depending on the details of the case - might then be
"he/she submits a parallel (or joint) claim".
Peter Stewart
On Jun 26, 2:59 pm, Rosie Bevan <rbe...@paradise.net.nz> wrote:
guesswork.
If the expansion "apponit clamium" is right, I suppose a translation
in this context - depending on the details of the case - might then be
"he/she submits a parallel (or joint) claim".
Peter Stewart
On Jun 26, 2:59 pm, Rosie Bevan <rbe...@paradise.net.nz> wrote:
The latter interpretation is nearest to the mark. It means literally
put in their claim. Until 1360 a final concord barred claims to
property of people who were not party to a fine and did not enter
their claim within a year and a day. The fine roll was endorsed in the
manner given by Michael, so that a person's stake in the land was
registered. After 1360 a statute removed this bar, and as this bar was
one of the attractions of the fine, the number subsequently decreased.
In the case of Hugh de Polsted, he was lord of the manor of Polstead,
but the reason for Alice's claim is not obvious to me.
Cheers
Rosie
On Jun 26, 2:52 pm, Peter Stewart <p_m_stew...@msn.com> wrote:
On Jun 26, 7:54 am, m...@btinternet.com wrote:
In the Suffolk Feet of Fines (35 Henry III, p 54) the above phrase
occurs in the following context:
"Bartholomew de Walsingham and Cecilia his wife, and her sister
Margaret v. Walter Gaugy and Alice his wife in Polstead (Alice
daughter of Cecilia and Hugh de Polsted appon' clam')."
Could some kind soul confirm the likely meaning of appon' clam' in
this context? I presume it means that Alice de Polsted was added as a
party to the transaction, and that she was therefore a distinct
individual to Alice wife of Walter Gaugy.
With the warning that I know nothing about legalese, I would guess
that this is short for "apponit clamium" (he/she stands by, supports
or joins in the claim).
Peter Stewart- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
-
Rosie Bevan
Re: Meaning of: appon' clam'
While we are on the subject of fines, it's worth putting in a mention
that last year, Chris Phillips took on the monumental task of
abstracting the 19,000 or so unpublished fines in the National
Archives (primarily 1360 onwards), and is making them available on his
web site at http://www.medievalgenealogy.org.uk/fines/index.shtml
He has covered a number of counties viz Berkshire, Buckinghamshire,
Cornwall, Cumberland, Devon, Dorset, Herefordshire, Northamptonshire,
Rutland, Shropshire, Somerset, Westmorland, and Worcestershire.
These abstracts can be searched at http://www.medievalgenealogy.org.uk/fines/search.php
and are invaluable to genealogists and local historians alike.
Cheers
Rosie
On Jun 27, 12:06 am, Peter Stewart <p_m_stew...@msn.com> wrote:
that last year, Chris Phillips took on the monumental task of
abstracting the 19,000 or so unpublished fines in the National
Archives (primarily 1360 onwards), and is making them available on his
web site at http://www.medievalgenealogy.org.uk/fines/index.shtml
He has covered a number of counties viz Berkshire, Buckinghamshire,
Cornwall, Cumberland, Devon, Dorset, Herefordshire, Northamptonshire,
Rutland, Shropshire, Somerset, Westmorland, and Worcestershire.
These abstracts can be searched at http://www.medievalgenealogy.org.uk/fines/search.php
and are invaluable to genealogists and local historians alike.
Cheers
Rosie
On Jun 27, 12:06 am, Peter Stewart <p_m_stew...@msn.com> wrote:
Thanks Rosie, there's no substitute for expertise, least of all in
guesswork.
If the expansion "apponit clamium" is right, I suppose a translation
in this context - depending on the details of the case - might then be
"he/she submits a parallel (or joint) claim".
Peter Stewart
On Jun 26, 2:59 pm, Rosie Bevan <rbe...@paradise.net.nz> wrote:
The latter interpretation is nearest to the mark. It means literally
put in their claim. Until 1360 a final concord barred claims to
property of people who were not party to a fine and did not enter
their claim within a year and a day. The fine roll was endorsed in the
manner given by Michael, so that a person's stake in the land was
registered. After 1360 a statute removed this bar, and as this bar was
one of the attractions of the fine, the number subsequently decreased.
In the case of Hugh de Polsted, he was lord of the manor of Polstead,
but the reason for Alice's claim is not obvious to me.
Cheers
Rosie
On Jun 26, 2:52 pm, Peter Stewart <p_m_stew...@msn.com> wrote:
On Jun 26, 7:54 am, m...@btinternet.com wrote:
In the Suffolk Feet of Fines (35 Henry III, p 54) the above phrase
occurs in the following context:
"Bartholomew de Walsingham and Cecilia his wife, and her sister
Margaret v. Walter Gaugy and Alice his wife in Polstead (Alice
daughter of Cecilia and Hugh de Polsted appon' clam')."
Could some kind soul confirm the likely meaning of appon' clam' in
this context? I presume it means that Alice de Polsted was added as a
party to the transaction, and that she was therefore a distinct
individual to Alice wife of Walter Gaugy.
With the warning that I know nothing about legalese, I would guess
that this is short for "apponit clamium" (he/she stands by, supports
or joins in the claim).
Peter Stewart- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -