Offices: Jabłonowski Stanisław (starost of Kowel (starosta kowelski)
Propination, inns, breweries: Jabłonowski Stanisław (brewery, inn, mill)
More than five hearths in one hand: Jabłonowski Stanisław (74)
Extracts from outside the registers
Records under sigla which the card index does not expand. They give no hearths, so they enter no total.
Pert.card 1)Pert., Wisniow - siedziba starostwa;
note: A one-line note on the character of the place, without hearths and without persons — the same type of record as „MP - Ciosna - do starostwa wiszniowskiego” on card 1) or „P. Kot Wiśniowski. - do starostwa wiśniowskiego” on card. The siglum is not in the list of sources, so it does not enter the reckoning of hearths. THE SIGLUM IS READ „Pert.” — four characters: a „P” with a lower loop, an „e”, an „r” and a crossed „t”, after them a full stop and a comma. The comparison with the neighbouring cards of the same hand decides it, where the same three lines of maps stand complete: card 1) (Wielgórz) writes „Pert. · Wielgor.”, and card „Perth. - niema” (there after the „t” the loop of an „h” is still plain). The shape from card 1) tallies with that from card 1), not with that from card. The list of sources in `karty.json` notes besides the form „Per.” with the expansion „Karol de Perthées, Mappa szczegulna woiewodztwa lubelskiego, 1786” — most probably the same map is meant, but the expansion is not on the card and I do not add it. IT IS WORTH NOTING that the note does not speak of belonging TO a starosty, but calls Wiszniew its SEAT — this is the only place in the whole set of cards of this leasehold where the seat is named outright. The words „siedziba starostwa” are written more thickly, gone over a second time. The name of the village in this line has the form „Wisniow”, without an acute over the „s” and without a letter descending below the line of writing. After the siglum a comma [reading uncertain: possibly a full stop].
Held.card 1)Held. Wisznow.
note: A one-line note with the name alone, without figures and without persons; the siglum is not in the list of sources, it does not enter the reckoning of hearths. The same siglum stands on card 1) („Held. Lipniak.”) and card („Held. Koty Młyn.”). The line is written finer than the rest and squeezed in between the Pert. line and the Top. line — three such micro-lines stand one beneath another in the left part of the card. READING UNCERTAIN: the name I read „Wisznow” (after „Wis” a letter descending below the line of writing, that is a „z”, then „n-o-w”), but at this size of writing „Wiszniow” is equally possible; the character between the „n” and the „o” I cannot decide. Between the siglum and the name there is no abbreviation „p.”, as it seems under low magnification: it is the descender of the letter „p” from the word „Top.” in the line below, running up into this line.
Top.card 1)Top. wiszniew
note: A one-line note with the name alone, without figures and without persons; the siglum is not in the list of sources, it does not enter the reckoning of hearths. The same siglum stands on card, card 1) („Top. Lipniak.”) and card („Top. osada Kot.”). READING UNCERTAIN: the name is written in a SMALL letter and PLAINLY CORRECTED — the letters in the middle of the word are written one over another and under magnification fall apart into two layers of writing; I read „wiszniew”, but I have no decision. What was corrected I do not reconstruct. Between the siglum and the name stands a bare full stop; what under low magnification looks like the abbreviation „p.” is furnished, in the Held. line above, by the descender of the letter „p” from that very word „Top.”.
Ls.89card 3)Ls.89. Star. wiśniowskie w posesji księcia Stanisława Jabłonowskiego kawalera orderu ś. Huberta obejmuje wsie: Wisniew, Kaczory, Ciosna, Myrcha, Wólka, Stok, Koty, Gośchowa, ⟨i wójtostwo domanickie; — WIERSZ PRZEKREŚLONY⟩ | młyn, grunt średni, łąki na pół grądowe z błotnemi, na płn. od Wiszniewa puszcza wiszniowska, | lasu ⟨szer. — skreślone⟩ dł. ¾ mili szer. ¼ mili zdatny tylko na łaty i krokwy, ochroniony przed wyrąbywaniem, młyny potrzebują reperacji.-
note: An extract under a siglum outside the list of sources, without a single figure of hearths and without a single householder — it does not enter the reckoning of hearths, just as the Ls.89 with Ciosna (card 2), Myrcha (card 2), Stok Wiszniewski (card 2), Kot Wiśniowski (card) and Baranek (cards 1)–313). The siglum is written „Ls.89.”, with a full stop after the „s” and a full stop after the figure. THIS IS THE FULLEST DESCRIPTION OF THE WHOLE LEASEHOLD IN THE ENTIRE CARD INDEX and the only place where the possessor is given the title of an order: „księcia Stanisława Jabłonowskiego KAWALERA ORDERU Ś. HUBERTA”. The forename „Stanisław” agrees with T89 on card 2) and with the abbreviation „Stan.” in the T90 on card 1). THE COMPOSITION OF THE LEASEHOLD FOR THE THIRD TIME DIFFERENT: Ls.89 counts up eight places — Wisniew, Kaczory, Ciosna, Myrcha, Wólka, Stok, Koty, Gośchowa — and was adding „i wójtostwo domanickie” besides, but that line he STRUCK OUT. The estate complex of Domanice (Domanice, Przywory, Kopcie, Czachy) of T89 and the villages Czachy, Domanice, Kopcie, Przywory of T90 are not named here at all; nor is Baranek. Koty stand here as a separate place of the enumeration, and not — as in T89 — as a settlement beside Wiszniew. RUDA IS NOT in this enumeration. THE ESTABLISHMENTS: „młyn” in the singular at the beginning of the sixth line and „młyny” in the plural at the end of the extract („młyny potrzebują reperacji”); T89 on card 2) counts 3 mills at Wiszniew, and the O83 of the same card adds a „młynek”. The the annotations dictionary does not know a marker „młyn” and I do not invent one. NEITHER AN INN, NOR A BREWERY, NOR PROPINATION DOES THIS EXTRACT NAME. UNCERTAIN READINGS: (1) „wiśniowskie” in the first line — after „wi” I see no letter descending below the line of writing, but the writing is faint and „wiszniowskie” remains possible; (2) „Gośchowa” — the acute stands over the „s”, so I read „ś”, but „Góschowa” with the acute over the „o” is equally possible; the ending „-owa”, not „-orza” as in T89 („Goschorza”) and T90 („Gostchorza”) — the forms I do not unify; (3) „puszcza” — the word at the right edge of the line, I read „puszcza wiszniowska”, but the middle of the word I do not decide; (4) „wyrąbywaniem” — the word broken by the end of the line with the sign „=” („wyrąby=” + „waniem”); the first letter is the same two-humped „w” as in „w posesji” and in „waniem”, so the word begins with a „w”, but between „wyrąbywaniem” and „wyrębywaniem” I do not decide. The fractions „¾” and „¼” are legible. The abbreviation „płn.” (north) is written „pn.” [reading uncertain as to one letter]. THE LABOUR DUES OF THE SUBJECTS THIS EXTRACT PASSES OVER — there are here neither draught days, nor foot days, nor settled homesteads of householders, otherwise than in the Ls.79 of Dębowierzchy or the Ls.89 of Karcze.
St.89card 4)St.89 - star. wiszniowskie w pos. Xcia Stanisława Jabłonowskiego - obejm. wsie: Wiszniow, Myrcha, Kopcie, Czachy, Kaczory, Stok, Przywory | w Wiszniowie: 350 l. (182 m., 168 k.); w tym: gosp.: (61 m., 57 k., 53 syn do l. 15, syn. od l. 15 - 15, cór 57); kom. (2 m., 3 k., 5 syn, 2 cór.); luźni: (23 m., 15 k., 6 syn, 5 cór.); żebraki (6 m., 12 k., 1 syn, 1 cór.); | sołtysi wiszniowscy: gosp. (4 m., 3 k., 3 syn., 6 cór.); kom. (1 k., syn., 1 cór.). luźni: (2 m., 3 k.). żebraki 2 k. | 5 l. Żyd. (4 m. 1 k.) w tym arendarz 3 m. ⟨1 k. — dopisane nad wierszem⟩ służący 1 m.;
note: An extract under a siglum outside the list of sources — it does not enter the reckoning of hearths; the siglum „St.89”, with a full stop after the „St” and without a space before the figure, the same as on card 2) (Stok Wiszniewski). WITHOUT A SINGLE FIGURE OF HEARTHS: it is a list of the population, not a register, and it enters no total of hearths. THE RECKONING OF THE POPULATION CLOSES TO A SINGLE PERSON — checked separately for both sexes, which confirms every figure read: in the village householders 61 m. + 53 sons under 15 + 15 sons over 15 = 129 m. and 57 f. + 57 daughters = 114 f.; lodgers 2 + 5 = 7 m. and 3 + 2 = 5 f.; the landless 23 + 6 = 29 m. and 15 + 5 = 20 f.; beggars 6 + 1 = 7 m. and 12 + 1 = 13 f.; the village headmen of Wiszniów: householders 4 + 3 = 7 m. and 3 + 6 = 9 f.; lodgers 1 son = 1 m. and 1 f. + 1 daughter = 2 f.; the landless 2 m. and 3 f.; beggars 2 f. In all 172 + 10 = 182 men and 152 + 16 = 168 women, that is exactly the „350 l. (182 m., 168 k.)” of the heading of the line. The agreement of the two sums independently confirms the reading of the record „kom. (1 k., syn., 1 cór.)”, where there is no figure beside „syn.” — there must be one son there. THE FIGURE 350 TAKES IN THE VILLAGE HEADMEN: it is not the total of the village itself (that comes to 324), but of the village together with the village headmen's lands. THE JEWS ARE COUNTED SEPARATELY: „5 l. Żyd. (4 m. 1 k.)”, and those five are the leaseholder with his household (3 m. + 1 f., added above the line) and a servant (1 m.) — 4 + 1 = 5, it closes. A LEASEHOLDER, but the word „propinacja”, „karczma”, „browar” or „młyn” this extract DOES NOT USE — the the annotations dictionary does not know the word „arendarz” and I do not invent a marker. THE COMPARISON WITH S87 (card 1): two years earlier the census of 1787 gave 279 people + 13 Jews = 292; St.89 gives 350 + 5 = 355. The difference I do not smooth over — these are two different sources and two different years, and besides St.89 counts in the village headmen. THE COMPOSITION OF THE LEASEHOLD FOR THE FOURTH TIME DIFFERENT: St.89 counts up seven villages — Wiszniow, Myrcha, Kopcie, Czachy, Kaczory, Stok, Przywory — without Ciosna, Wólka, Koty, Domanice, Goschorze, Ruda and Baranek. Not one of the four lists (T90 card 1), T89 card 2), Ls.89 card 3), St.89 card 4) agrees with the rest; none do I supplement. „Xcia” = „Xięcia” (księcia), of the prince — the abbreviation I expand only in this note, in the text of the extract it stays as on the card. The adjective „wiszniowskie” here with a plain „sz” (a letter descending below the line of writing).
spellings on the cards: Wiszniew, Wisniow, Wiśniow, Wisznow, Wiszniow, Wisniew, wiszniew
district of łukowski · parish of Zbuczyn · cards 1), 2), 3), 4)
a royal village, the seat of the starosty (leasehold) of Wiśniów, in the possession for life of Prince Stanisław Jabłonowski, starost of Kowel; a manor house, a brewery, an inn, 3 mills (O83 besides a „młynek”), 68 cottages and 5 village headmen's hearths = 79 hearths together with the settlement of Koty and Ruda Młynarze [O83 (IX), T89]; 65 village hearths of the 2nd class + 5 of the village headmen = 70 [T90]; a chapel [V48]; a mill, the land middling, the meadows half upland and half boggy, to the north of Wiszniew the forest of Wiszniów, a wood ¾ of a mile long and ¼ of a mile wide, fit only for laths and rafters [Ls.89]; in 1789, 350 Christians (182 m., 168 f.) and 5 Jews (among them a leaseholder), in all 355 [St.89]
| Year | Source | Entries | Hearths |
|---|
| T75 | Hearth tax register 1775 | 1 | 240 |
| T89 | Hearth tax register 1789 | 2 | 79 |
| T90 | Hearth tax register 1790 | 2 | 70 |
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.
These years count more here than the locality itself: 1775 — the whole starosty of Wiszniew and Domanice — villages in two parishes; 1789 — the village of Wiszniew together with the settlement of Koty and Ruda Młynarze — the card index does not break these hearths down between the three localities. Such a figure must not be set beside the other years as two measurements of the same locality — these are different units of account, not a loss of hearths.
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.
1789 T89Hearth tax register 1789
JabłonowskiStanisławstarost of Kowel and Wiszniów (starosta kowelski i wiszniowski)starost of Kowel (starosta kowelski)
T8974 hearths1 manor house, 1 brewery, 1 inn, 3 mill, 68 cottagesprince (książę)possessorT89 - starostwo wiśniowskie księcia Stanisława Jabłonowskiego dożywotne; składa się z 2 kluczy: 1) wiszniowski ma wsie: Wiszniow z osadą Koty i Ruda z Młynarzami, wieś Kaczory, Goschorza, Ciosna, Stok, Wólka, Myrcha (Mercha); 2) domanicki ma wsie: Domanice, Przywory, Kopcie, Czachy; || a) wieś Wiszniow z osadą Koty i Ruda Młynarzami - dwór, brow. karcz., 3 młyny, 54 chał. o 1 gosp., 12 chał. o 2 gosp., 2 chał. z ogrod.card 2)
HERE ARE BOOKED THE HEARTHS OF RUDA AND KOT FOR THE YEAR 1789. Entry a) does not concern Wiszniew alone: it takes in „wieś Wiszniow Z OSADĄ KOTY I RUDA MŁYNARZAMI”, that is three places together, and the card index DOES NOT BREAK these 74 hearths down among them. This agrees with the cross-references on the neighbouring cards, checked and copied out literally: „T89 - Koty zob. Wiszniew;” (card, Kot Wiśniowski) and — on card 1), where in the heading the place for the village name is empty and all the extracts speak of Ruda (S87: „Ruda wiśniowska - 7 l.”, V48: „Ruda.”, O83 (IX): „Ruda - jeden chłop młynarz. starostwo wiśniowskie;”) — „T89 - Ruda Młynarzami zob. Wiszniew;”. THE NAME IN THE RUDA CROSS-REFERENCE RUNS „Wiszniew”, not „Wiśniew”: after „Wi” stands a letter descending below the line of writing, that is a „z”, exactly as in the headings of cards 1)–550 [checked at fourfold magnification with the background evened out]. THE CROSS-REFERENCE CONCERNS THE YEAR 1789 ALONE: Ruda has a figure of hearths of its own in T90 on the same card 1) („w uroczysku Ruda zwanym młyn wodny — 1 dym wiejski 2giej klasy”), and the separate extracts Pert., Held., Top., Ls.89 likewise remain with it. The year 1789 for Kot and for Ruda is therefore booked in this one place — and until the owner decides otherwise, the hearths of these three places cannot be separated; to credit Wiszniew with the whole 74 (79) hearths counts Kot and Ruda along with it. THE BREAKDOWN OF THE BUILDINGS CLOSES TO THE SINGLE HEARTH: 1 dwór + 1 brow. + 1 karcz. + 3 młyny + 54 chał. o 1 gosp. + 12 chał. o 2 gosp. + 2 chał. z ogrod. = 74, and with entry b) (5) it gives the „Razem 79 dymów.” stated on the card. The three groups of cottages are summed in the breakdown of buildings into the single field „chaty” = 68, as at Ciosna and Karcze. THREE MILLS: the figure written in digits, the word „młyny” in the plural; these are the same mills of which T90 on card 1) says „oraz młyny: Ruda i Kot”, except that T90 counts two and T89 three — the third is probably the „młynek” of O83 on the same card, but the card index does not say so and I do not add it. THE the annotations DICTIONARY DOES NOT KNOW A MARKER „młyn” and I do not invent one. THE COMPOSITION OF THE STAROSTY DIFFERS FROM T90: T89 divides it into TWO ESTATE COMPLEXES — that of Wiszniów (Wiszniow with the settlement Koty and Ruda Młynarzami, Kaczory, Goschorza, Ciosna, Stok, Wólka, Myrcha) and that of Domanice (Domanice, Przywory, Kopcie, Czachy) — while T90 on card 1) lists eleven villages in a run and adds Baranek, of which T89 says nothing here. The forms of the names: „Goschorza” (T90 on card 1): „Gostchorza”) [reading uncertain as to the middle of the word], „Myrcha (Mercha)” — the second form the card index itself puts in brackets. In the list of the estate complex stands „Ruda Z Młynarzami” (with the preposition, added in a small „z”), and in the reckoning a) „Ruda Młynarzami” (without the preposition) — I do not unify the two forms. The adjective in the first line I read „wiśniowskie”, in the fourth „wiszniowski” — the difference checked at sevenfold magnification: in the first word after „wi” there is no letter descending below the line of writing, in the second there is a distinct one. The word „dożywotne” [reading uncertain: possibly „dożywotnie”].
1790 T90Hearth tax register 1790
JabłonowskiStanisławstarost of Kowel and Wiszniów (starosta kowelski i wiszniowski)starost of Kowel (starosta kowelski)
T9065 hearthsprince (książę)possessorT90.- dobra król., dzierżawa Wiśniowska, w poses. ks. Stan. Jabłonowskiego starosty kowelskiego; należy do niej wsi: Wiśniow. Wólka Wiśniowska; Stok Wiśniowski; Myrcha; Ciosna; Czachy; Domanice; Gostchorza; Kaczory; Kopcie; Przywory; oraz młyny: Ruda i Kot. — Należy tu nadto wieś Baranek. — || a) wieś Wisniow ———— 65 dymów wiejskich 2giej klasycard 1)
THE HEADING OF THE WHOLE LEASEHOLD AND THE FIRST ENTRY OF THE RECKONING IN ONE: four lines describing the estate, and beneath them a two-line reckoning a)/b) and the total. The letters „a” and „b” are on the card, so the entry number takes them literally. THE POSSESSOR: „ks. Stan. Jabłonowskiego starosty kowelskiego” — this is the same prince Jabłonowski whom O83 at Ciosna (card 1) calls „starostą kowelskim i wiszniowskim”; here the title is shorter (of Kowel alone) and the forename appears in abbreviation („Stan.”), which at Ciosna it did not. „ks.” I expand as „książę”, prince, in the status (as at Ciosna), because a princely house is meant, not a clergyman. THE COMPOSITION OF THE LEASEHOLD — ELEVEN VILLAGES AND TWO MILLS: Wiśniow, Wólka Wiśniowska, Stok Wiśniowski, Myrcha, Ciosna, Czachy, Domanice, Gostchorza, Kaczory, Kopcie, Przywory — „oraz młyny: Ruda i Kot”. Ruda and Kot are here called MILLS, not villages, and stand outside the list of villages; this agrees with „Held. Koty Młyn.” on card and with Ls.89 on card („Młynarze Koty … młyn posiadają”). After the full stop an addition in another breath: „Należy tu nadto wieś Baranek.” — Baranek attached separately, outside the eleven. The names „Gostchorza” and „Kopcie” [reading uncertain as to the endings]. THE the annotations DICTIONARY DOES NOT KNOW A MARKER „młyn” and I do not invent one — the mills remain in the text of the extract and in the village's the description of the village. The figure 65 is underlined; the formula „dymów wiejskich 2giej klasy” runs just as it does at Ciosna, Karcze, Gozd, Kij, Annonin and Lipniaki. The whole T90 extract is written in BLUE ink, the rest of the card in black.
O83 O83A description of 1783 [the expansion of the siglum to be confirmed]
JabłonowskiStanisławstarost of Kowel and Wiszniów (starosta kowelski i wiszniowski)starost of Kowel (starosta kowelski)
O83prince (książę)possessorO83 (IX) - Wisniow - wieś królewska w dożywotniej posesji księcia Jabłonowskiego starosty kowelskiego; młynek; dwór, karczma (p. 26)card 2)
A characterization of the village, not a list of hearths — hence the hearths figure is empty. The number in brackets I read as the Roman „IX”, as at Ciosna (card 1) and Stok Wiszniewski (card 1). O83 gives no forename for the prince — the surname alone remains; the forename „Stanisław” is given only by T89 on the same card, and T90 on card 1) the abbreviation „Stan.”. „ks.” I expand in the status as „książę”, prince (as at Ciosna), and not as „ksiądz”, priest. A SHORTER TITLE THAN AT CIOSNA: here „starosty kowelskiego”, at Ciosna „starosty kowelskiego i wiszniowskiego”. ESTABLISHMENTS: the line lists „młynek; dwór, karczma” — MŁYNEK, a little mill (a diminutive, written clearly: m-ł-y-n-e-k), and not „młyn”; T89 on the same card counts 3 mills at Wiszniew. The the annotations dictionary does not know a marker „młyn” and I do not invent one; the little mill remains in the text of the extract and in the village's the description of the village. The word „karczma” and the cross-reference „(p. 26)” were added below the line, lower than the rest, and squeezed in between the O83 line and the T89 line — „(p. 26)” is probably a reference to a page of the source, which the card index does not expand; nor do I expand it. The name of the village in this extract has the form „Wisniow”, without a letter descending below the line of writing.
