in hunc actum ipsi impresse collata

Pica Vetus

New Member
I made this transcription of a rather difficult to read 1717 marriage record:

8° coniunxit in matrimonium R.D. van den Abeele canonicus et pastor tertiae portionis huius ecclesiae iurisdictione in hunc actum ipsi impresse collata Gasparem Daeninck et Joannam van Peene coram Francisco de Thieu et Joanne Coolsaet testibus

Can anyone make sense of this record, especially the “iurisdictione in hunc actum ipsi impresse collata“ part?
 

Laurentius

Civis Illustris
I left the names in Latin because I don't know how they are called for real, also not sure what the 8° at the beginning means.

8° R.D. van den Abeele clergyman and shepherd of the third portion of this church with the authority brought to him over this act* united in wedding Gaspar Daeninck and Joanna van Peene at the presence of the witnesses Franciscus de Thieu and Joannis Coolsaet.

*I didn't translate impresse here because I am not sure what it may mean, I wonder if it's about the clergyman having stamped or printed documents giving him authority or if it just means something like "fully". Do you have idea?
 

Pica Vetus

New Member
Thanks so much for your translation.
8° refers to the date: the eight of that month ....
R.D. = Reverendus Dominus
Impresse is one of the obstacles. Some want to read "expresse" in it.
Some also want to transcribe hunc actum by hanc actam, but even then I still don't see the sense of it. Do you?
Sincere thanks.
Georges
 

Przibram

Member
Hi! "Impresse" could be the banns of marriage. They were usually posted at the doors of the church for some time, so if anybody opposed the marriage they could request its cancellation. But, against this suggestion, I cannot see why the priest would "print" (=impresse) the Banns at a cost when he could do it handwritten for free. Either the marriage was significant enough to afford print the Bann, or perhaps for some semantic reason "impresse" could mean the banns, either handwritten or printed.
 
Last edited:
Top