Page:Archaeological Journal, Volume 8.djvu/405

OUIfllNAL DOCUMENTS. 309 vero omnium bonorum nieorum non logatorurn lego ct do cxccutriei nice, iit ipsa fuoiat ct dispoiuit prout vidcrit deo bene pbicerc, et sahiti aiiime iiieo nielius expedire, et ad istud testaineiitiiin tideliter exe(|ueiHhun Oiiiigeam uxorein meam ordino execiitrieciu faeio et eonstituo ; siipervisorenj«|uo urdiiio donipiium Johaniieiu Kyngc, Abbatem de Bukfust/ Datum apud Tottou', Anno, die et loco snpradietis." (Seal of red wax, much broken, affixed in like manner, and impressed by the same matrix, as the former.) Original endorsement : — " Tcstamcntum Ambrosii Frauncko uuper de Totton' M." (Magna?) In a later band : — " The testament of Ambrose Francke, by which he dcviseth vnto Oringe bis wyfc for terme of ber lyfe, and after her decease to .loanc bis dawgbter in taile, and for default of such to uses forbydden, two Tenements, of which thone lyeth in T.ychwel strete, and thother in llarpiswill street, iu Totnes." It is remarkable that these two wills, which diifer in date no less than ninety years, and do not purport to have been sealed by any one, should have attached to them one and the same seal, — which, tlnuigh very nuuh broken, is evidently of an ecclesiastical character, but does not appear to be the seal of any ecclesiastical court, or of an officer of any such court. Yet, except so far as any surmise to the contrary may arise from the identity of the seal, there is nothing to indicate that either of them is not the original will of the testator. The contemporaneous indorsements, " Testameutum," and "Hoc est testamentum," certainly import rather that they are originals than copies. In addition to which, seeing that they so closely I'csemble each other, that if either of them be original, in all probability they both are, and that in the later of them a blank seems to have been left for the name of the supervisor, which was afterwards filled up apparently in a ditferent hand and with different ink (a circumstance hardly recoucileablc with the supposition of its being a copy), I confidently conclude they are both originals. In neither case is there any reason to suppose the seal was intended for the testator's ; and had it been that of any ecclesiastical court in which the wills were proved, or of an officer of any such court, it is almost certain the fact of their having been proved would have been stated on them. In Madox's Form. Angl., pp. 423 and 424, two instances occur of original wills of very early date, having respectively three and four seals appended to them, and there is no reason to think that any one of them was the seal of the testator, or of any ecclesiastical court or officer. Each of the documents under consideration had a second slip of parchment, and one of them retains it ; yet it has not the appearance of having been the label of a second seal. These anomalies are sufficiently rare to merit an attempt to explain them ; and if, for this purpose, we glance at the manner in which wills were in those days made, authenticated, and disposed of, it may serve at the same time to extend our ac([uaintance with the peculiarities of ancient writings of a testamentary kind. During the period within which these documents respectively bear date, ^ This (locuuicnt su|ii)lics the uamc of an Abbott ol" Biukfastlcigli not bcfori- aMcrUiniil. In Dr.Olivei's list (Moiiast. E.xoti. p. 372) Joliii Jlatthei occurs iu 1451 followed bv Joliii Rode in U9«.