Rowce

Parish of Zbuczyn, łukowski county.

Dear reader, remember that this is an AI study, that it may contain errors; treat it as indicative and verify it for yourself.

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 1)MP - Rowce - do starostwa zbuczyńskiego;

note: A one-line note of appurtenance, without hearths and without persons — exactly the same type of record as „MP. - Karcze - do starostwa zbuczyńskiego” on card 1) and „MP - Dębowierzchy - do starostwa kąkolewnickiego” on card 1). The siglum without a full stop („MP -”). It does not enter the reckoning of hearths, in line with the practice of the village files hitherto. It is worth noting that MP and O83 speak of the STAROSTY of Zbuczyn, and T90 and T89 of the LEASEHOLD of Zbuczyn — I do not unify the two forms.

Ls.89card 2)Ls.89. wś. do star. zbuczyńskiego - osiadłości gosp. 12, chałupnik 1, grunt, częścią do Zbuczyna podobny, częścią [lepszy — skreślone] podlejszy.- łąki nad rzeką [wyraz nieodczytany],

labour dues: settled homesteads of householders: 12, cottagers: 1

note: A description of the village in the formula known from other Ls89 cards („w. do star. …; osiadłości gosp. N; grunta …, łąki …”; cf. card 3) Dębowierzchy, card 2) Karcze). The figures „osiadłości gosp. 12” and „chałupnik 1” are the state of settlement, NOT hearths — they do not enter the the hearths figure field; they coincide to the unit with „12 chat. o 1 gosp.” and „chat. bez gruntu i ogrodu” of T89 on card 1), but these are two different sources and I do not merge them. A STRUCK-OUT WORD: after the second „częścią” the author wrote a word beginning with the tall loop of an „l”, struck it out with a long horizontal stroke and added beside it „podlejszy”; the struck-out word I read as „lepszy” [reading uncertain] — the correction turns the judgment of the soil into its opposite, so I record it openly. AN UNREAD WORD: the last word of the extract, after „łąki nad rzeką”, nine or ten characters, ending in „-e” and closed with a comma. The shape of the letters roughly: a long approach, an arc with a small stroke above it, „e”, „r”, „e”, „ć”, a letter with a long underswing, a letter with a tall shaft and a crossbar, „e”. The reading was made from a magnification up to ninefold, with the background evened out, with local binarization and sharpening — without a resolution. The candidates which I do NOT enter in the text of the extract, because I can defend none of them: „przecięte”, „przerżnięte”, „przyległe”. It requires an inspection of the original. The siglum written „Ls.89.” — with a full stop after „Ls” and after the number (on card 2) „Ls89.”, on card 2) „Ls. 89”, on card 2) „Ls.89”, on card 2) read „Lsp 89”, on card 3) „Ls.79”). The abbreviation „wś.” written with a dot over the „s” and a full stop after it, so that at the first inspection it looks like „ws:”.

St.89card 2)St.89 - wś - do star. zbuczyńskiego - 76 l. (39 m., 37 k.); gosp.: (12 m., 12 k., syn 25, cór. 21); zagr. (1 m., 1 k.); chałupn.: (1 m., 1 k., 2 cór.);

note: A SIGLUM FROM OUTSIDE THE LIST OF SOURCES — „St.89”, written with an ornamental ligature of „S”+„t” with the index „89”; the same hand and the same shape as „St. 89” on card 2) (Karcze) and „St.89” on card 2) (Myrcha). An extract without hearths and without surnames. The card's reckoning closes exactly, down to a single person, and confirms the reading: men 12 (gosp.) + 25 (syn.) + 1 (zagr.) + 1 (chałupn.) = 39; women 12 (gosp.) + 21 (cór.) + 1 (zagr.) + 1 (chałupn.) + 2 (cór. chałupn.) = 37; in all 76, exactly what the card gives in brackets, „76 l. (39 m., 37 k.)”. Beside the householders the card writes „syn 25” (without a full stop, in the singular form), beside the daughters „cór. 21”; beside the cottagers „2 cór.”. A NOTE ON THE SOURCES: these 76 persons are NOT the figure of S87 (card 1): „74 l. + 2 ż: razem 76 l.”), although the two totals are identical. They are two different censuses from two different years — 1787 and 1789 — and I do not treat the coincidence as proof that they are one source; I do not merge them. It is worth noting besides that S87 sets apart 2 Jews, while St.89 divides the whole 76 among householders, a cottar (zagrodnik) and a cottager, leaving no room for a Jewish population — I record the discrepancy of structure, I do not resolve it.

spellings on the cards: Rowce, Ruwce

district of łukowski · parish of Zbuczyn · cards 1), 2)

a small royal village, belonging to the starosty of Zbuczyn [O83 (IX)]; a brewery, an inn, 12 cottages with one householder, a cottage without land or garden [T89]; settled homesteads of householders 12, 1 cottager, the land in part like that of Zbuczyn, in part poorer [Ls.89]

Population 1787

of whom Christians

of whom Jews

persons per hearth

5.1

Year	Source	Entries	Hearths
T89	Hearth tax register 1789	1	15
T90	Hearth tax register 1790	1	15

Without an extract for 1775 and 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.

This locality in the full edition of the hearth-tax registers — together with a search across all persons, a modern map, Perthées’s engraving of 1786 and a statistical summary.