Lower Counties' Provincial Tax Lists: A Note on Paleography

Lower Counties' Provincial Tax Lists: A Note on Paleography Jeffrey L. Scheib L'URTHER EXAMINATION of one of the names on the New Castle .1; County tax list in the author's "Provincial Tax Lists of the Three Lower Counties, 1693" (Pennsylvania Genealogical Magazine, 37 (19911:1-32) provides a useful object lesson in the paleographic pitfalls awaiting genealogists and other scholars attempting to use seventeenth-century documents as primary sources. Additionally, readers are advised of two errors that have been noticed in the published tax lists. The 1693 assessment list for the town of New Castle and the Christina precinct of New Castle County includes the estate, valued at £240, of "Broer Senese."' The author has, however, been advised by Peter Stebbins Craig, ID., a recognized authority on the history and genealogy of the colonial descendants of the pioneers of New Sweden, that in a copy of a hand-written transcript of the tax list in his personal collection of source materials, the surname is rendered "Senixe."2 A reexamination of the original manuscript tax list by the author ruled out "Senixe" as an accurate transcription of the surname, but it also raised the possibility that "Senese" was also inaccurate. In the 1684/5 county tax list, included in the New Castle court records, and elsewhere in the court records, the name in question is rendered "Broer Senex."' In retrospect, "Senex" would probably have been the best way to render the surname in the provincial tax list also; however, establishing "Senex" as the accurate form of the name on the basis of the provincial tax list alone would be difficult, if not impossible. No other surname on the New Castle tax list terminates in the letter "x"; thus, a direct comparison of the name in question with other names ending in "x" is not possible. The tax list does, however, include other names that contain the letter "x," but a 192 A Note on Paleography 193 comparison of those names with the problem name was inconclusive. The questionable letter or letters somewhat resemble the writer's "x" as used in the manuscript in the name "Thomas Nixon," but both the disputed letter or letters and the "x" in "Nixon" differ from the writer's "x" as it appears in "William Dixon." Moreover, in the original manuscript document, the names of Nixon and Dixon both appear on the same page as Senese/Senex. Furthermore, the form of a letter used at the end of a word can differ from the form of the same letter used in the midst of a word, as is frequently the case with the letter "s" in other documents of the same period as the tax list. At any rate, when in doubt about the correct rendition of a letter, word, or name in any primary source document, the transcriber should always attempt to compare the uncertain matter with other appearances of the same or similar letters or words within the same document or, if necessary or possible, with other contemporary documents by the same writer.4 Readers are also advised that two errors have been noticed in the published tax lists. The first error is located in the assessment list for the Red Lyon precinct of New Castle County (p. 11). The name Henry Oalson should appear between the names of Peter Oalson and Peter Broadberry. As with Peter Oalson and Peter Broadberry, Henry Oalson was assessed the six-shilling rate for freemen whose estates were worth less than £100.5 The second error occurred in the Sussex County tax list. As it was noted (p. 3) that the assessment list for Sussex County was arranged in descending order of value of estate, it should come as no surprise to readers that the assessed value of the estate of William Orr (p. 25) should read 500 (for £500) rather than 5000. Finally, the text of note 16 (located on p. 31), appended to the name Johannes Sardyne (p. 5) on the assessment list for the town of New Castle and the Christina precinct, was incomplete and potentially misleading. It was suggested that the surname Sardyne, the spelling of which is very clear in the original document, was an error for jardin or Jardine. The assumption was based on the appearance of John Jardin in the early court records of New Castle County. The intent was actually to refer to "Doctor John Desjardins" (who had died by 5 June 1678, leaving a widow, Mary}, who appeared in the first volume of the New Castle court records.' Moreover, in connection with the orthography of this surname, it is interesting to note that Dr. Desjardins's name also appears in the New Castle court records as "Disjardins," 194 The Pennsylvania Genealogical Magazine "De jordins," "Disardins," "Disjardius," and "Desiardines."7 The spelling Sardyne may thus represent an evolution rather than an error. Notes 1. Jeffrey L. Scheib, "Provincial Tax Lists of the Three Lower Counties, 1693," Pennsylvania Genealogical Magazine, 37 ( 1991):9. The assessment in question appears on p. 5 of the original manuscript document. 2. Letter from Peter Stebbins Craig, J.D., to the author, 28 Aug. 1991. 3. Records of the Court of New Castle an Delawatn Vol. II, 1681-1699: Land and Probate Abstracts Only (Colonial Society of Pennsylvania, 1935), 102, 221. 4. The writer who compiled the New Castle tax list has not been identified. A comparison of the manuscript tax list with contemporary county deed books, which has not been done, might prove helpful, as the county clerk who recorded deeds might have been chosen to prepare the final, official copy of the county's provincial tax list. 5. The author is grateful to Peter Stebbins Craig for noticing the omission. The missing name appears on p. f of the original manuscript New Castle Co. tax list. 6. Records of the Court of New Castle on Delawam 1676-1681 (Colonial Society of Pennsylvania, 1904), 216, 289, 297, 383. 7. Ibid., 102, 149-50, 216, 246-47, 268-69.