Parish of Łuków, łukowski county.
Offices: Potocki Kajetan (starost of Dymir (starosta dymirski)
More than five hearths in one hand: Potocki Kajetan (58)
Extracts from outside the registers
Records under sigla which the card index does not expand. They give no hearths, so they enter no total.
MPcard 2)MP.- Dąbie - do dzierżawy gręzowskiej;
note: A note of affiliation, without hearths and without persons — the same type of record as the notes „MP - … - do starostwa …” from cards 2), 275, 360 and 419 and „P. Ruda - do starostwa wiśniowskiego;” from card 1). The whole extract fits in one line. ¶ THE SIGLUM „MP”, after it a full stop and a short stroke („MP.-”); between the name of the village and the rest stands a second, distinctly longer stroke („Dąbie - do…”). The full stop after the „P” is small and sits low, on the line of writing; I do not rule out that the author meant to set two strokes („MP=”) — [reading uncertain as to the punctuation alone, it does not change the sense of the extract]. The card index gives no expansion of the siglum and I add none. ¶ THE LINE IS CLEAN, WITHOUT A DELETION. At the first approach, on the stitched frames, it looked struck through with a long horizontal stroke running across the words „do dzierżawy gręzowskiej”. That was an artefact of the stitching: neighbouring frames overlap by about 25 px, the MP line stands exactly at the join of the bands `b-pas1` and `c-pas2` and in the composite showed twice, with a vertical shift. In the single frame `b-pas1` the whole line reads smoothly and there is not one cancelling stroke on it. I note this, because the opposite mistake — taking the artefact for a deletion — would change the import of the extract. ¶ „gręzowskiej” — the adjective from Gręzówka near Łuków; the same form as in the T89 and Ls.89 lines on the same card. That name DOES NOT OCCUR anywhere else in this card index (checked in `karty.json`). The line is closed with a semicolon; beyond it, as far as the right-hand edge of the card, blank paper remains.
Ls.89card 2)Ls.89. ws. do dzierżawy gręzowskiej; z uprzywilejowanej po | sesji Kajetana Potockiego, z tradycyjnej po= | sesji Wincentego Ciechomskiego | karcz., grunta w równinie, Łąki i pastwiska błot= | ne, lasu niema, tylko zarośle,
note: An extract under a siglum from outside the list of sources, without a single figure of hearths — it does not enter the reckoning of hearths, just as Ls.89 at Ciosna (card 2), Myrcha (card 2), Karcze (card 2), Baranek (card), Brzozowica (card 2), Lipniaki (card 2) and Ruda (card 1). The siglum written „Ls.89.”, with a full stop after the „s” and a full stop after the „89”, the figures smaller and lower, like a subscript. ¶ FOUR LINES, of which three are indented; the break to the fourth line (the descriptive one) I mark in the text of the extract with a vertical stroke. The breaks between the lines I mark in the text of the extract with a vertical stroke. The word „posesji” the author carries over to the next line TWICE, but NOT IN THE SAME WAY: the first time (the end of the first line) he ends the line with „po” alone, WITHOUT any mark of division — checked in the single frame `c-pas2`, behind the letter „o” there is nothing but blank paper as far as the right-hand edge of the card; the second time (the end of the second line) he sets a double stroke of division („po=”). This inconsistency I transcribe literally, instead of levelling it. With a double stroke „błot=” at the end of the fourth line is carried over too. ¶ TWO PERSONS WHOM I DO NOT COUNT INTO THE INDEX, BECAUSE THE SIGLUM IS FROM OUTSIDE THE LIST: KAJETAN POTOCKI — the same man whom T90 and O83 on card 1) call starost of Dymir (starosta dymirski), here without an office; WINCENTY CIECHOMSKI — a surname appearing in this card index FOR THE FIRST TIME (checked in `karty.json` and in `nazwiska.json`: there is no heading „Ciechomski”). The reading of both surnames is certain, checked at an eightfold and a fourteenfold magnification. ¶ „z uprzywilejowanej posesji … z tradycyjnej posesji …” — the card index sets possession by privilege (royal, for life — which agrees with the „dzierżawa dożywotnia”, the life lease, of O83) against possession by tradition, that is by a formal investiture, a giving into holding. The word „Tradycyjnej” is written with a capital letter. How the succession of the two possessors is to be understood the card does not say; I infer nothing from it. ¶ THE DESCRIPTION OF THE LAND: „karcz., grunta w równinie, Łąki i pastwiska błot=ne, lasu niema, tylko zarośle,”. The word „Łąki” is written with a capital letter and read after setting its letters beside the words „karcz.” (the same „k” — a tall staff with a tooth at the foot) and „tylko” (the same „ł”): Ł-ą-k-i, with the tail of the „ą” going below the line of writing. „zarośle” has a diacritic over the „s”. The line breaks off with a comma, not a full stop, but beyond it, as far as the right-hand edge of the card and down to the lower edge, there is not one further pixel of writing — this is the end of the extract, not a cut of the frame. ¶ THIS EXTRACT GIVES NO LABOUR DUES OF THE SUBJECTS AT ALL: neither draught days, nor foot days, nor rent, nor the settled homesteads of the householders — otherwise than Ls.79 at Dębowierzchy („brow. karcz. osiadłości gosp. 12”) or Ls.89 at Lipniaki. I therefore lay out no the dues field. ¶ „karcz.” — the only mention of an establishment in this extract; Ls.89 does not name the brewery, although T89 names it a line above. Neither the word „propinacja” nor the word „młyn” is there. ¶ The third line of this extract („sesji Wincentego Ciechomskiego”) stands at the join of the frames `c-pas2` and `d-pas3` and is read from the stitching of the two bands; in stitching I kept in mind the overlap of about 25 pixels, so as not to take the doubled image of the line for a deletion or for an equals sign.
spellings on the cards: Dąbie
district of łukowski · parish of Łuków · cards 1), 2)
a royal village, on a life lease to Potocki, starost of Dymir (starosta dymirski) [O83 (IX)]; royal estates, the leasehold of Dąbie in the possession of Kajetan Potocki, starost of Dymir, to which belong the villages of Dąbie and Jagodne — the grange of Dąbie with the village 58 village hearths of the 2nd class [T90]; a royal village [V48]; 54 royal hearths [T75]; a royal village belonging to the Gręzówka leasehold — a manor house, a brewery, an inn, 50 cottages with 1 householder = 53 hearths [T89]; an inn, the land on the plain, boggy meadows and pastures, no forest, only scrub — from the privileged possession of Kajetan Potocki, from the traditional possession of Wincenty Ciechomski [Ls.89, a siglum from outside the list]; 174 l. + 11 ż. in all 185 l. [S87]
| Year | Source | Entries | Hearths |
|---|
| T75 | Hearth tax register 1775 | 1 | 54 |
| T89 | Hearth tax register 1789 | 1 | 53 |
| T90 | Hearth tax register 1790 | 1 | 58 |
Without an extract for 1794 — no card of this village carries that tariff. It is a missing extract in the card index, not a gap in the numbering of the cards.
The card-index entries
Every extract for this locality in the wording of the cards, year by year. One block is one occurrence: this person, in this year. At a collective item the same card text stands beside every person named — because the card names them together and they must not be separated. The hearths given at a collective item are an equal division among those named, not a reading.
1790 T90Hearth tax register 1790
PotockiKajetanstarost of Dymir (starosta dymirski)starost of Dymir (starosta dymierski)starost of Dymin (starosta dymiński) [reading uncertain]
T9058 hearthspossessorT90 - dobra król., dzierżawa Dąbie, w poses. Kajetana Potockiego starosty dymirskiego. - należą do niej wsie: Dąbie i Jagodne. | Folwark Dąbie ze wsią - 58 dymów wiejskich 2giej klasy;-card 1)
One entry for the whole village, the numbering „1” editorial: the register of 1790 does not divide Dąbie into holdings, but describes the estate and gives one collective figure. ¶ THE EXTRACT TAKES UP THREE LINES, all in BLUE ink (the rest of the card is black); the third line („Folwark Dąbie ze wsią…”) is indented. The break onto the indented line I mark in the text of the extract with a vertical stroke. ¶ 58 HEARTHS, the figure UNDERLINED with a simple stroke, preceded by a short horizontal stroke („- 58”). Checked in the single frame `d-pas3`: there is ONE stroke. In the stitching of the frames it looked like an equals sign, because the strips overlap by about 25 px and the line was doubled with an offset — that was an artefact of the stitching, not the writing of the card. The formula „dymów wiejskich 2giej klasy” is standard in this card index (276 occurrences in `karty.json`); the figure of the class was checked at twentyfold magnification and set beside the ones from the same card („174”, „11”) and from card 2) („o 1 gosp.”): those ones are a plain approach stroke and a stem, whereas here the character has a curled hook at the top, an oblique descent and a horizontal base — it is a „2”, not a „1”. ¶ THE HEARTHS STAND COLLECTIVELY, AND THE CARD DOES NOT WRITE OUT THE BUILDINGS HERE — I do not open the field the breakdown of buildings. The figure takes in „folwark Dąbie ze wsią”, that is the grange together with the village of Dąbie; the second village of the lease, Jagodne, the card does not account for in this figure and gives no separate figure for it. ¶ THE COMPOSITION OF THE LEASE: „należą do niej wsie: Dąbie i Jagodne”. The name „Jagodne” is NOWHERE else in this card index (checked in `karty.json`) — this is its only occurrence. ¶ KAJETAN POTOCKI, STAROST OF DYMIR — the only place on either card where the lessee has his forename given beside his office; O83 on the same card gives the surname alone, and Ls.89 (card 2) again the forename. The office I read as „starosty dymirskiego”: d-y-m-i-r-s-k-i-e-g-o, checked at sixteenfold magnification on both occurrences (T90 and O83) — after „dym” stands an „i”, then an „r” with its characteristic tooth, not an „n”. ¶ A DISCREPANCY BETWEEN THE SIGLA WHICH I DO NOT SMOOTH OVER: here and in O83 the lease is called „dzierżawa Dąbie” and is held by Potocki, starost of Dymir; on card 2) T89, MP and Ls.89 agree in saying that Dąbie belongs „do dzierżawy gręzowskiej”. Two different names for the leasehold unit in two different years; the card does not reconcile them, and neither do I.
O83 O83A description of 1783 [the expansion of the siglum to be confirmed]
PotockiKajetanstarost of Dymir (starosta dymirski)starost of Dymir (starosta dymierski)starost of Dymin (starosta dymiński) [reading uncertain]
O83possessorO83 (IX) - wieś królewska, dzierżawy dożywotniej Potockiego, starosty dymirskiego;card 1)
A short description of the village, without figures — the hearths figure empty. The extract takes up two lines, both black; the second line („starosty dymirskiego;”) is cut across by the boundary of the frames `d-pas3`/`e-pas4` and was read only from the stitching of the two strips. The line closes with a semicolon; below it, down to the lower edge of the card, there is not one pixel of writing left. ¶ THE CARD GIVES NO FORENAME HERE — „Potockiego” alone. That Kajetan is meant is known from T90 on the same card and from Ls.89 on card 2), but I do not carry that over into the field the given name: I record as much as this extract says. ¶ „dzierżawy dożywotniej” — a lease for life, the same formula as at Trzebieszów („w dożywotniej dzierżawie Józefa Siennickiego”) and at Kąkolewnica („dożywotniej dzierżawy Józefa Antoniego Rudnickiego”). This extract gives no name for the lease itself. ¶ The Roman numeral „(IX)” in brackets after the siglum — just as with the other villages of this card index.
