Skip to content
Let us seek what unites, let us avoid what divides
The Jasiński Family of JasionkaThe Łuków Land·Zbuczyn parish
PL

https://jasinscy.org.pl/notariaty-testamenty-analiza-en.html

Notarial records · State Archive in SiedlceRead with the help of Claude AI models

Wills in the notarial deeds of Łuków and Siedlce — a general analysis

A synthesis based on full readings of 501 last-will deeds from 9 notaries (1810–1839). Every figure and claim refers to the deeds in the form “Notary number/year”; the deeds themselves, the persons and the full readings are in the edition.

The manuscripts were read by Claude AI models and the family relations were checked a second time against every deed. Doubtful places carry [?] or “?” — please consult the manuscript of the entry before drawing conclusions.

Notarial deeds — Łuków and Siedlce (edition, search of deeds and persons)

1. The Corpus and Method

This synthesis describes the material as of 7 October 2026. It rests solely on abstracts of 501 acts of last will and related acts, all prepared to a single template, and on tables computed from those abstracts. The acts come from 9 notaries and from the years 1810–1839. The earliest were drawn up in the Siedlce chanceries (Witkowski 12/1810; Mościcki 38/1810), and the latest comes from there too (Szczawiński 70/1839); the Łuków material falls within 1811–1837 (Szaniawski 422/1811; Roguski 345/1837).

The chanceries are very unevenly represented:

The acts have been divided into groups by type. Wills, including codicils and joint wills, number 375 (75 %) (Szaniawski 422/1811). Deposits, publications and attestations of private or oral wills number 55 (11 %) (Modrzewski 56/1826), dispositions of property among children or in the event of death 20 (4 %) (Witkowski 22/1813), revocations 27 (5 %) (Szaniawski 262/1814), and derivative or other acts 24 (5 %) (Szaniawski 454/1818). The content tables — formulas, heirs, sums, pious legacies — were computed on the 450 dispositive acts, that is, on the first three groups taken together.

The register. The register of all acts connected with death and inheritance has 1558 entries. Of these, 599 belong to the acts of last will (557 wills and 42 dispositions); 497 of them have an abstract, and 102 are awaiting a full reading. The backlog is unevenly spread:

Beyond the acts of last will, the register contains 333 inventories, 183 auctions, 373 derivative acts and 70 other entries; the synthesis does not cover them. On the other hand, 4 acts from outside this category do have abstracts. In 20 cases an act entered in the register as an act of last will turned out, on full reading, to be something else: a receipt (Roguski 38/1834) or a contract for the purchase of a house (Szaniawski 225/1833). Two such cases in Chojnacki’s records have another cause: in 1822 his office kept two series of numbers, the register points to wills of series II, while the full reading covered the acts of series I with the same numbers — an assignment of a sum and preliminary terms for the sale of an estate (Chojnacki 96/1822; Chojnacki 113/1822); the series II wills still await reading.

Distribution over time. The years are not evenly covered, and Siedlce shows a clear gap: the five years 1820–1824 account for only 20 (7 %) acts there, all from the records of Olędzki and Chojnacki (Olędzki 23/1820; Chojnacki 83/1822). This is largely a consequence of how far the reading has progressed, not of a shortage of acts. It is precisely Chojnacki's wills of 1818–1821 and Modrzewski's of 1822–1825 that are still waiting in the register, and the abstracts begin only in 1822 for Chojnacki and in 1826 for Modrzewski (Chojnacki 213/1822; Modrzewski 37/1826). What we know of Siedlce in 1818–1825 is therefore provisional. The same applies to 1830–1839, from which many of Szczawiński's acts have not yet been read (Szczawiński 30/1832).

How the figures were obtained. Every abstract has fixed fields: from the type and form of the act, through the person of the testator and the formulas, to heirs, legacies, debts, executors, guardians, witnesses, signature and links with other acts. Quotations in the abstracts are verbatim, in the old spelling and with markers of uncertain reading; that is how I cite them below. The tables assign acts to classes according to expressions searched for in the text of the fields. Percentages are rounded, and the word absent means only that the abstract does not record the item in question.

Limitations. The most serious is the unevenness of chanceries and years. Szaniawski supplies more than a third of the corpus, Lipnicki a mere 12 acts (Szaniawski 422/1811). In Siedlce the notaries succeed one another: 1810–1819 belongs mainly to Witkowski and Mościcki, Olędzki follows, and 1830–1839 belongs to Modrzewski, Szczawiński and Chojnacki (Witkowski 14/1810; Chojnacki 11/1834). In Łuków Roguski appears after Szaniawski (Szaniawski 357/1833; Roguski 37/1834). Any change over time may therefore be a change in the habits of a chancery rather than a change among the people.

Classification by expressions is repeatable, but it goes astray on unusual cases. A secret will in Hebrew landed in the class without title rather than among the Jewish (Starozakonny) testators, because the abstract gives no title (Chojnacki 41/1827). A will under which the testator's sons and daughters inherit ended up in the class of grandchildren (Witkowski 41/1813). There are more revocations following recovery than the table shows (see part 2), and the class without title takes in farmers and a village headman as well as owners of whole estates (see part 3).

Acts are counted, not persons. Four acts concern Canon Jan Jezierski: his will, a codicil and two renunciations by the executors he had named (Szaniawski 569/1816; Szaniawski 454/1818). The wills of Józef Grabowski from 1829–1833 were published in the Tribunal on a single day; the president's letter lists five of them, they occupy six numbers in the corpus, and the abstracts do not make it entirely clear which sheets belong to which act (Chojnacki 55/1834; Chojnacki 56/1834). The will of Kazimierz Wierzycki (Wierzejski) of Wierzyki, drawn up on 24 April 1831, most likely entered the corpus twice, once as a certified copy and once after publication in the Tribunal; the two abstracts differ over his wife's maiden name (Szaniawski 70/1831; Szaniawski 112/1832).

Some texts are incomplete. Sometimes only the covering letter survives, without the text of the will (Szaniawski 67/1828; Szczawiński 10/1830); sometimes the text breaks off halfway (Chojnacki 100/1836) or has been read only in small part (Olędzki 98/1819). Sums were computed only from items in which a single sum stands in a single currency, with no marks of uncertainty. Medians are more reliable here than totals, because totals are inflated by a few great fortunes (Chojnacki 53/1834; Chojnacki 112/1833).

2. The Character of the Wills

Forms. The most common is the public will, written down by the notary from the testator's oral declaration: 331 (74 %) of the dispositive acts (e.g. Szaniawski 422/1811). Written wills, deposited in the records later, are clearly fewer: 50 (11 %) written in another hand, 27 (6 %) holographic, and 25 (6 %) where the abstract does not say who wrote them (Szaniawski 129/1818). In addition there are 11 (2 %) acts in the form of a declaration, statement or agreement made before the notary (Witkowski 351/1817) and 5 (1 %) oral wills made before witnesses (Szaniawski 274/1813; Modrzewski 92/1833).

The notarial protocol has its variants. It may be drawn up as questions and answers (Lipnicki 4/1811; Witkowski 12/1810), or dictated outright — „podyktował mnie Notaryuszowi Akt niniejszy” [dictated the present act to me, the notary] (Mościcki 166/1816). The oral will is always a special case here. Witnesses declare the last will of a dead woman who could not come before the notary „dla ubostwa” [on account of poverty] (Szaniawski 274/1813); they attest the verbal gift of a garden (Szaniawski 417/1816); and in two acts a Jewish testator's will was written down by witnesses in Hebrew and deposited in translation (Szaniawski 20/1818; Szaniawski 93/1832).

Codicils, mutual and secret wills. There are 4 (1 %) codicils, and each supplements a will made in the same year in the same chancery. Canon Jezierski uses one to complete his elaborate will (Szaniawski 569/1816; Szaniawski 573/1816), and Feliks Jurkoski of Domaniny Kępki adds the grain and sown crops he had left out of his will (Szaniawski 60/1829; Szaniawski 61/1829). A supplement to a will was also deposited years afterwards (Chojnacki 212/1833). Spouses make wills in each other's favour in a single act (Szczawiński 4/1838; Szczawiński 5/1838) or on the same day in separate acts (Chojnacki 108/1825; Chojnacki 109/1825). A secret will, deposited under seal, was revoked and taken back out of the records (Mościcki 49/1814; Mościcki 50/1814), and a secret will in Hebrew was opened at a sitting of the Tribunal (Chojnacki 41/1827). Even a private letter was deposited as a last will (Szczawiński 123/1835).

Łuków and Siedlce, change over time. In Łuków the will written down by the notary accounts for 158 (78 %) of the dispositive acts, in Siedlce for 173 (70 %) (Szaniawski 20/1820). The difference grows with time. In Łuków the share of this form does not drop noticeably below three quarters in any of the three decades, and in 1830–1839 it stands at 52 (80 %) (Szaniawski 160/1817). In Siedlce it falls from 93 (92 %) in 1810–1819 to 39 (42 %) in 1830–1839 (Witkowski 41/1813; Szczawiński 46/1832). In Chojnacki's records for this last decade the holographic will is already the most common form — 7 (37 %) (Chojnacki 4/1833; Chojnacki 32/1834).

Who comes before the notary changes in the same way. Across the corpus the testator appears in person in 336 (75 %) acts, and in Witkowski's always — 43 (100 %) (Szaniawski 98/1812; Witkowski 8/1812). Acts forwarded by the Court of Peace or by the president of the Tribunal make up 83 (18 %) (Szaniawski 792/1817); in Siedlce in 1830–1839 they already amount to 39 (42 %), and in Chojnacki's records for those years to 16 (84 %) (Chojnacki 54/1834; Chojnacki 100/1836). In Łuków in the same decade the testator appears in person in 52 (80 %) acts (Roguski 501/1835).

A will made at home reached the records late, and the date of the act is then not the date of the will. Jan Dworak Wierzchowski of Wierzchowiny wrote his will on 29 March 1819, but the notary received it from the Court of Peace only on 2 December 1820 (Szaniawski 368/1820). The will of Michał Biernacki of Krasusy Łęgnowola was drawn up on 30 November 1819 and published in the Tribunal on 28 December 1819, yet it entered the records as an act of 1820 (Szaniawski 53/1820).

The year 1831. The corpus has only 10 (2 %) acts from 1831, but 26 (5 %) from 1832 and 29 (6 %) from 1833 (Szaniawski 168/1831; Chojnacki 75/1833). Some of the wills deposited in 1832–1833 had been written privately in 1831, sometimes with an explicit reference to the war: „w czasie Chwili Woiennych” [in time of war] (Szaniawski 92/1832), „w czasie teraznieyszym woiennym” [in the present time of war] (Szaniawski 93/1832), „w czasie krytyczney Woyny” [in the time of a critical war] (Modrzewski 27/1832). A testator about to join the army disposes of his property, „Będąc zmuszony w potrzebie Krajowey udać się do Woyska ku obronie Oyczyzny” [being compelled, in the country's need, to join the army in defence of the Fatherland] (Modrzewski 76/1833), and in another act a private will is explained by the absence of a notary: „dla Braku Rejenta w Powiecie Łosickim[?]” [for want of a notary in the district of Łosice] (Szczawiński 45/1832).

Conclusion: in Siedlce in 1830–1839 more and more wills are made privately and reach the notary only after the testator's death, by way of the court; the notary more often keeps a will drawn up elsewhere than writes one himself. Part of this shift may be connected with the war of 1831, when a notary was harder to reach and wills were written at home, before the commune head (wójt) and witnesses (Modrzewski 27/1832; Szczawiński 45/1832). This explanation fits the abstracts but is not proven by the figures; the make-up of the clientele may also play a part — large landowners left private wills here as well (Chojnacki 51/1834; Chojnacki 53/1838) — and so may the progress of the reading.

At home and at the bedside. A mention that the will was written in the testator's house or at the bedside appears in 94 (25 %) wills — in Siedlce in 64 (33 %), in Łuków in 30 (17 %) (Chojnacki 254/1824). The notary was called to the sick person's house: Witkowski to a house in Długa Street in Siedlce (Witkowski 39/1810), Roguski to houses whose numbers he noted in the act (Roguski 436/1835; Roguski 134/1837). Acts were also drawn up late in the evening and at night (Lipnicki 108/1811; Roguski 91/1835). When one testator could no longer speak at noon, the act was put off and completed a few hours later (Mościcki 54/1811). It could also be the other way round: an eighteen-year-old testator from Mordy was brought to the chancery on a cart (Witkowski 457/1817).

Illness. The testator is ill or weakened in 350 (78 %) of the dispositive acts, and in 314 (84 %) of the wills proper (Szaniawski 422/1811). The proportion is higher in Łuków — 180 (89 %) — than in Siedlce — 170 (69 %) (Szaniawski 535/1818). A mention of lying in bed occurs in 79 (18 %) acts, more often in Siedlce, where it is a phrase favoured by two chanceries: „leżąca na Łóżku” [lying in bed] (Witkowski 315/1811) and „na łożku spoczywaiącego” [resting on his bed] (Mościcki 170/1812). The testator is expressly said to be in good health in 48 (11 %) acts (Modrzewski 177/1826), and among the dispositions between living persons the parties are healthy in 9 (45 %) (Witkowski 22/1813; Modrzewski 7/1835).

Age. A number of years is given in 56 (12 %) acts; the median is 63 years, the range 17–95, and 19 of these figures are approximate, in the manner of „lat mniey więcey, Trzydzieści maiący” [being thirty years of age, more or less] (Szaniawski 422/1811). The youngest testator is an unmarried girl of 17 (Szaniawski 220/1820), the oldest the ninety-five-year-old widower Mikołaj Krasuski of Krasusy Gołowierzchy (Witkowski 318/1811). Age was recorded where the chancery had the habit of doing so: in Łuków a number of years appears in 43 (21 %) acts, in Siedlce in only 13 (5 %), whereas Siedlce prefers the formula of full age — 38 (15 %) acts against 10 (5 %) in Łuków (Chojnacki 213/1822; Szaniawski 158/1813). The absence of an age in an act therefore tells us nothing about the age of the person.

Dispositions between living persons. This group is small — 20 (4 %) acts — and concentrated in two Siedlce notaries: Witkowski 7 (15 %), Modrzewski 6 (11 %); Łuków has 3 (1 %) (Modrzewski 145/1834; Szaniawski 146/1820). In them parents allot shares to their children, reserving for themselves „dożywocie do skończenia dni życia swoiego” [usufruct for life to the end of their days] (Witkowski 22/1813) or „dożywocie i zamieszkanie przy Urodzonym Franciszku Jastrzębskim Zięciu Swoim” [usufruct for life and a home with the nobleman Franciszek Jastrzębski, their son-in-law] (Modrzewski 7/1835). Some abstracts note explicitly that the act does not call itself a will, or that it is an act between living persons. In one a father allots shares to two sons; in another Sebastian Ługowski divides his property between two daughters, keeping an equal share for his soldier son should he return; in a third a mother gives her daughters her share in Choja (Witkowski 86/1813; Olędzki 659/1818; Modrzewski 102/1832). Here too belong a prenuptial settlement with reciprocal provisions in the event of death (Szczawiński 77/1830) and an act in which a father names an adviser for his wife's future guardianship of the children (Chojnacki 180/1834). The sample is too small for comparing chanceries.

Revocations. Of the 27 revocations, 21 (78 %) give no reason, 4 (15 %) cite recovery of health, and 2 (7 %) revoke the will only in part (Szaniawski 377/1820; Szaniawski 423/1818). There are, however, more revocations following recovery than the table indicates, because other acts also mention a return to health in the field on the state of health (e.g. Szaniawski 231/1816; Szaniawski 394/1824). Wawrzyniec Dębowski of Dębowica made his will while ill and revoked it within the same year, once „z Łaski Boga przyszedł do Zupełnego Zdrowia” [by the grace of God he had come to full health] (Szaniawski 140/1823; Szaniawski 282/1823). Other reasons come from ordinary life: one testatrix had since borne three children and come into an inheritance from her brother (Olędzki 68/1817); another withdraws a legacy because „Maiątku sama dla siebie potrzebuie” [she needs the property for herself] (Szaniawski 231/1816). Only 2 (7 %) revocations invoke Article 895 of the Code — „stosownie do Artykułu 895. Kodexu Cywilnego” [in accordance with that article of the Civil Code] (Szaniawski 291/1823; Szaniawski 345/1833) — and 2 (7 %) Article 1035, once explicitly as an article „Kodexu Napoleona” [of the Napoleonic Code] (Mościcki 49/1814; Szczawiński 42/1832).

Conclusion: the will here is above all an act of illness and approaching death; written with one particular illness in mind, it is sometimes revoked after recovery (Szaniawski 282/1823). Dispositions made in life, with usufruct reserved for the parents, were usually drawn up by people in good health, or whose health the act does not mention — people planning to hand over the farm. For the genealogist they are the equivalent of a will, since they name the children, their shares and the parents' usufruct for life, although in law they are a gift or a partition (Witkowski 86/1813; Modrzewski 7/1835).

3. Status and Milieu

Sex and marital status. In the 450 dispositive acts the testators are men in 303 (67 %), women in 142 (32 %), and spouses jointly in 5 (1 %) (Szaniawski 98/1812). Women are slightly more numerous in Siedlce — 83 (34 %) — than in Łuków — 59 (29 %); the most are in Szczawiński's records, 22 (45 %) (Szczawiński 42/1829; Szczawiński 163/1836). Married men make wills most often — 198 (44 %) — followed by married women — 83 (18 %). There are 43 (10 %) widows, few widowers, unmarried women and bachelors, and in 69 (15 %) acts no marital status is given (Szaniawski 527/1812). Married women thus make wills more often than widows, many of them with the assistance of their husbands (Szaniawski 231/1816; Szczawiński 89/1837).

Conclusion: a married woman here disposes of property that is her own — her dowry, her share of her parents' estate, a legacy from her first husband — and her husband's presence at the act is a formality, not an obstacle (Lipnicki 40/1811; Chojnacki 162/1829; Szczawiński 40/1832).

Titles and status groups. The title Urodzony (the noble title) is borne by 182 (40 %) testators, Wielmożny (a higher honorific) by 64 (14 %); together the nobility make up 246 (55 %) (Szaniawski 422/1811). A further 149 (33 %) have no title. Urban and courtesy titles — Pan or Jegomość, Sławetny, Szlachetny — are held by 32 (7 %) testators (Szaniawski 435/1813). There are 13 (3 %) clergy and 8 (2 %) Jews, while the title Uczciwy, proper to peasants, is borne by only 2 testators: Paweł Pasternak, a landholder in Łuków, and Antoni Kreski, a peasant on government land (Szaniawski 92/1815; Modrzewski 20/1831). The nobility are more numerous in Siedlce — 145 (59 %) — than in Łuków — 101 (50 %); urban titles are held by 24 (10 %) testators in Siedlce and 8 (4 %) in Łuków (Mościcki 13/1813).

Over time the share of the nobility falls from 127 (71 %) in 1810–1819 to 63 (40 %) in 1830–1839, while the share of acts without a title rises from 18 (10 %) to 87 (55 %) (Witkowski 246/1811). To a large extent this is a change in recording. In Szaniawski's acts of 1830–1839 as many as 32 (89 %) testators have no title, whereas in Roguski's, in the same area and the same decade, 20 (69 %) are styled Urodzony (Szaniawski 72/1830; Roguski 118/1835). The same localities show this most clearly. In Szaniawy Poniaty Kazimierz Szaniawski appears without a title in Szaniawski's records (Szaniawski 72/1830), while Antoni and Tomasz Szaniawski appear before other notaries as Urodzony (Roguski 320/1835; Szczawiński 20/1838). In Gołaszyn Wojciech Gołaski is an untitled farmer for Szaniawski, while Fabian Gołaski is Urodzony for Roguski (Szaniawski 138/1831; Roguski 16/1836). It is the same in Domaniny Gąsiory (Szaniawski 264/1830; Roguski 79/1837).

The class without title, moreover, brings together very different people: small part-owners in gentry localities (Szaniawski 29/1820), owners of whole estates (Chojnacki 51/1834; Chojnacki 128/1838), senior officials (Chojnacki 184/1826), townspeople (Szaniawski 331/1832), farmers and a village headman (sołtys) (Szaniawski 24/1827; Szaniawski 364/1829). In private wills the title sometimes appears only on the reverse of the sheet, outside the text itself (Szczawiński 69/1832; Szczawiński 61/1833).

Conclusion: the class without title does not mean peasants. The decline in the nobility's share in 1820–1839 is above all the result of some chanceries ceasing to record titles, and of private wills often omitting them (Szaniawski 72/1830; Roguski 320/1835). The question can be settled only by comparing the same families in the acts of different notaries; a testator's occupation and property say more about his standing than the title given in a single act.

Town and country. According to the table, the testator lives in a town in 91 (20 %) acts and falls into the rural category in 349 (78 %), while in 10 (2 %) the place is unknown; townspeople number 56 (23 %) in Siedlce and 35 (17 %) in Łuków (Witkowski 14/1810). The most frequent localities are the chancery towns themselves — Siedlce 46 (10 %) and Łuków 35 (8 %). After them come small gentry localities: Gołaszyn, Zalesie, Szaniawy Poniaty, Wierzchowiny, Dębowica, and alongside them the small town of Mordy (Szaniawski 494/1815; Szaniawski 650/1817; Olędzki 135/1817). Many have two-part names, and the testator owns a share in them: Domaniny Zythy (Szaniawski 422/1811), Krasusy Gołowierzchy (Szaniawski 278/1821), Borki Paduchy (Witkowski 74/1813), Izdebki Kosny (Olędzki 394/1818).

Occupations and fortunes. The largest group consists of part-owners (dziedzice części), holders of land in pledge and leaseholders (Szaniawski 389/1812). Beside them stand officials and men of the law — a keeper of mortgages, a defender at the Police Court, a judge of the Tribunal, a clerk of the Court of Peace, a registrar of the mortgage office, the land judge of Drohiczyn (Szaniawski 396/1813; Chojnacki 184/1826; Olędzki 17/1819). There are soldiers, from a captain of the guard and a cavalry captain down to a man who calls himself „ubogiego Polskiego Żołnierza” [a poor Polish soldier] (Witkowski 66/1812; Chojnacki 12/1834). There are medical men — a doctor of medicine and a master surgeon (Witkowski 319/1811; Mościcki 14/1814) — and craftsmen: a tanner, a saddler, a brass-worker (Witkowski 46/1814; Szaniawski 11/1832; Chojnacki 244/1825), as well as innkeepers and tapsters (Roguski 37/1834; Szaniawski 78/1830). At the other end stand a farmer who was the son of a manor hand (Szaniawski 24/1827), a peasant on government land (Modrzewski 20/1831), an estate steward (Szaniawski 105/1832) and a manor servant who writes „u ktorey to Pani moiey i Jey Męża cały wiek życia mego w usługach strawiłem” [in the service of my mistress and her husband I spent my whole life] (Szczawiński 54/1829). The aristocracy is represented by a daughter of Count Ossoliński (Mościcki 259/1811), great landed property by the owner of the Żarnówka estate (Chojnacki 51/1834).

Jews, clergy, other confessions. There are 8 (2 %) Jewish testators: 6 (3 %) in Łuków, all in Szaniawski's acts (Szaniawski 20/1818; Szaniawski 62/1826; Szaniawski 171/1833), and 2 (1 %) in Siedlce (Mościcki 146/1815; Olędzki 98/1819). To these must be added the secret will in Hebrew which the table did not assign to this group (Chojnacki 41/1827). The testator may be a rabbi, with rabbis from other towns as guardians of his under-age son (Szaniawski 489/1819). Wills were written in Hebrew and deposited in Polish translation, sometimes a sworn one (Mościcki 146/1815; Szaniawski 171/1833). Religious law stands in them beside the law of the land: „Zostawiaiąc się do Religii naszey Mojżeszowey i prawa Kraio=wego” [abiding by our Mosaic religion and the law of the land] (Szaniawski 171/1833), „tak iak ustawy Religiyne przepisuią, i tak iak przepisy Kraiowe mieć chcą” [as the religious statutes prescribe and as the laws of the land require] (Chojnacki 41/1827).

There are 13 (3 %) clergy — parish priests, canons, a school professor (Szaniawski 569/1816; Witkowski 208/1812; Olędzki 17/1821). A Protestant, a tanner from Mokobody, wishes to rest „na Miejscu do pochowania ciał dla Ewangelików Służącym w Mieście Powiatowym Węgrowie” [in the place serving for the burial of Protestants in the district town of Węgrów] (Witkowski 46/1814). The heirs of the surgeon Antoni Tolde live in Bohemia (Mościcki 14/1814), and the Siedlce acts occasionally contain notes and signatures in German (Chojnacki 244/1825).

Literacy. A sign of the cross, or a statement that the testator „nie umie pisać” [cannot write], appears in 256 (57 %) acts; the testator signed in 156 (35 %), and in 18 (4 %) was too weak to sign (Szaniawski 422/1811). Women make a cross in 99 (70 %) acts, men in 153 (50 %); the nobility in 146 (59 %), while the clergy sign in 12 (92 %) (Lipnicki 62/1811). In Łuków the cross predominates more clearly than in Siedlce — 136 (67 %) against 120 (49 %). In Łuków in 1830–1839 only 11 (17 %) testators sign, in Siedlce in the same years 43 (47 %) (Szaniawski 78/1830; Szczawiński 26/1837). The wording of an act does not always reflect what happened at the table: the will of a Jewish widow of Łuków carries the usual formula about the sign of the cross, although according to the notes in the abstract the testatrix made the mark „OOO” (Szaniawski 62/1826).

Conclusion: illiteracy is widespread even among the petty gentry around Łuków; the higher proportion of signatures in Siedlce goes together with a larger share of townspeople, officials and holographic wills. A cross made by a sick testator, however, may reflect weakness and not merely an inability to write (Szaniawski 535/1818; Szczawiński 90/1833).

4. Formulas and Legal Construction

Invocation. In 361 (80 %) acts there is no invocation (Szaniawski 422/1811). In Łuków its absence is almost the rule — 184 (91 %); Lipnicki and Roguski never use one (Lipnicki 62/1811; Roguski 375/1835). The exception among the notaries is Mościcki, in whose records „W Imię Oyca y Syna y Ducha Swiętego Amen.” [In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, Amen.] opens 26 (72 %) acts (Mościcki 38/1810; Mościcki 245/1811). The invocation „W Imię Troycy Przenayświętszey Oyca, Syna, i Ducha Świętego Amen.” [In the name of the Most Holy Trinity, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, Amen.] appears in the wills of clergy and nobility (Szaniawski 569/1816; Mościcki 259/1811). In Siedlce in 1830–1839 the invocation of the Most Holy Trinity occurs in 14 (15 %) acts, all of them privately written wills deposited in the records later (Modrzewski 131/1831; Chojnacki 100/1836). All of Józef Grabowski's wills open with the words „W Imie Wielkiego Boga.” [In the name of Great God.] (Chojnacki 51/1834). Jewish testators write „Chwalę Boga Naywyższego” [I praise God Most High] (Mościcki 146/1815) or „Z pomocą Boską” [with God's help] (Chojnacki 41/1827), and a retired official who owned a manor farm opens his will by invoking the monarch: „W Imieniu Nayiasnieyszego Alexandra Cesarza Wszech Rossyi Krola Polskiego.” [In the name of the Most Serene Alexander, Emperor of All the Russias, King of Poland.] (Olędzki 174/1817).

The health formula. The formula weak in body, sound in mind appears in 213 (47 %) acts, sound in mind without mention of the body in 116 (26 %), sound in body and mind in 49 (11 %), and 64 (14 %) acts have none at all (Szaniawski 20/1820). Each chancery has its own wording here, and its own history of that wording. In Szaniawski's early acts the testator is „lubo li na ciele osłabiony, na umyśle iednak zupełnie zdrowy” [although weakened in body, yet entirely sound in mind] (Szaniawski 422/1811; Szaniawski 98/1812), in later ones increasingly „lubo na siłach ciała osłabiony, na umyśle iednak zupełnie zdrowy” [although weakened in bodily strength, yet entirely sound in mind] (Szaniawski 20/1820; Szaniawski 29/1820). In Witkowski's acts the formula reads „Lubo na Ciele osłabiony Jednak na Umyśle Zdrowy” [though weakened in body, yet sound in mind] (Witkowski 233/1812). Modrzewski, in whose records 16 (33 %) testators declare themselves sound in body and mind, writes „zdrowym będąc na ciele y umyśle” [being sound in body and mind] (Modrzewski 177/1826). In Roguski's acts the formula of the mind alone appears in 22 (76 %) acts and runs „na Umyśle iednak zupełnie zdrowy, i przytomny” [yet entirely sound and lucid in mind] (Roguski 396/1835).

Motivation. A sentence on mortality is absent from 300 (67 %) acts (Szaniawski 422/1811). Where one is present, it repeats a handful of ideas: that whoever is born must die — 44 (10 %), that no one knows the day or the hour — 35 (8 %), that death is near, or that one must submit to the decree of God (Witkowski 74/1813; Szaniawski 316/1818). The motivation is a clear mark of the chancery. In Roguski's records 16 (55 %) acts say „czy mnie Bóg Naywyższy do Zdrowia przywróci lub do wieczności powoła” [whether God Most High restores me to health or calls me to eternity] (Roguski 279/1835), in Witkowski's 14 (33 %) recall „Niedościgłe Wyroki Boga Ktore Kres Życia każdego z Ludzi zamierzyły” [the unfathomable decrees of God which have set the term of every man's life] (Witkowski 66/1813), and in Lipnicki's it occurs in no act at all (Lipnicki 205/1811). Beside the formulas there are sentences of the testators' own. The will is meant to avoid „pomiędzy Dziećmi swemi w czasie zostawić kłótni” [leaving quarrels among one's children in time to come] (Szaniawski 650/1817); a testator does not wish „bez Rozrządzenia z tego Świata schodzić” [to depart this world without making dispositions] (Szaniawski 333/1825), or observes soberly that man „prędzey czy później oddać musi dług naturze” [sooner or later must pay his debt to nature] (Szczawiński 113/1838).

Commendation of the soul. A commendation of the soul or a profession of faith appears in 77 (17 %) acts; it is most frequent in Witkowski's records — 19 (44 %) — and absent from Lipnicki's and Roguski's (Witkowski 240/1812). Often it is not a committal of the soul to God but a request that the family remember it: „Pamięć o Duszy mey Żonie y Dzieciom moim polecaiąc” [commending the remembrance of my soul to my wife and children] (Witkowski 240/1812). Elaborate religious formulas are found especially in private wills (Modrzewski 131/1831). Two wills from Radomyśl have almost the same formula: „Duszę moię krwią Jezusa Chrystusa odkupioną miłosierdziu Boga w Troycy Świętey Jedynego oddaię” [I commend my soul, redeemed by the blood of Jesus Christ, to the mercy of God, One in the Holy Trinity] (Modrzewski 65/1830) and „Duszę moią Krwią Jezusa Chrystusa odkupioną Miłosierdziu Boga w Troycy Świę-tey iedynego oddaię” [the same words] (Szczawiński 32/1829); the abstracts, however, do not say who wrote them. The case is different around Jasionka and Borki, where the neighbours' wills were written by the wójt Kazimierz Jasieński (Jasiński). In three of them, from 1829–1831, the soul is commended to the care of All Saints: „Naypierw Bogu Wszechmogącemu Oddaię duszę moię i Opiece Wszystkich świętych polecam” [first I give my soul to Almighty God and commend it to the care of All Saints] (Szczawiński 54/1829), „Duszę moią iako od Boga wziętą Temuż oddaię i Opiece Wszystkich Swiętych polecam” [my soul, as received from God, I return to Him and commend to the care of All Saints] (Modrzewski 27/1832); the third is similar (Modrzewski 136/1831).

Conclusion: the invocation, the health formula, the motivation and the commendation of the soul tell us more about the chancery or the local scribe than about the testator. The formula of soundness of mind affirms the capacity to dispose, and so it stands even in the acts of people who were gravely ill; the field on illness is a surer guide to the testator's condition (Szaniawski 422/1811; Witkowski 315/1811). In private wills the formulas were chosen by whoever wrote the will, not by the notary, as in the wills written in the hand of the wójt Jasieński (Szczawiński 54/1829; Modrzewski 27/1832); a common model for the Radomyśl wills remains a hypothesis (Modrzewski 65/1830).

References to the law. In 385 (86 %) acts there is no reference to the law at all (Szaniawski 422/1811). The most frequent is Article 1007 — in 18 (4 %) acts, and in 9 (19 %) of Modrzewski's — but these are not the testator's words: they are the Tribunal's annotation on the publication of a private will, with the formula „z duchem Artykułu 1007. Kodexu Cywilnego zgodne” [in keeping with the spirit of that article of the Civil Code] (Modrzewski 56/1826; Szaniawski 168/1831). General references such as „stosuiąc się do prawa” [conforming to the law] or „podług Prawa Kraiowego” [according to the law of the land] occur in 17 (4 %) acts, most often in Witkowski's (Szaniawski 396/1813).

When testators speak of the law themselves, it is usually about the limits of their freedom to dispose; this happens in 11 (2 %) acts. A widow from Skolimów knows that „gdy Prawo maiącym więcey Jak Troie Dzieci przez Szczodrobliwości rozporządzać więcey niedozwala Jak czwartą część Maiątku” [since the law does not allow those with more than three children to dispose by gift of more than a fourth of their property] (Witkowski 42/1813); a Łuków testator assigns „Czwartą Część Maiątku powyższego jako prawem do rozrządzenia mi pozostawioną” [a fourth part of the above property, as left to my disposal by law] (Roguski 375/1835). A childless testator reserves the reserved portion for his mother: „Stosownie do praw Kraiowych Część obowiązkową zastrzegam” [in accordance with the laws of the land I reserve the reserved portion] (Mościcki 166/1816); in another act the reserved portion goes to the testatrix's father (Szczawiński 113/1838). Specific articles of the Civil Code are rare. Article 910 appears with legacies to public institutions, which had to be approved by the viceroy through the Government Commission of Justice (Chojnacki 184/1826), Article 913 with the disposable portion (Szaniawski 252/1833), Articles 350 and 351 „K. C. Króle: Polskiego” [of the Civil Code of the Kingdom of Poland] with the appointment of an adviser to a mother acting as guardian (Chojnacki 180/1834), and Articles 916 and 920 of the Code of Civil Procedure with wills from the time of the war (Szaniawski 92/1832; Szaniawski 93/1832).

Older orders survive alongside the Code. Statutory inheritance is called inheritance „z Prawa Natury” [by the law of nature] in 4 (1 %) acts (Szaniawski 98/1812; Witkowski 351/1817). A testatrix of 1811 invokes Austrian law, „stosuiąc się do Prawa bywszego Austryackiego, które rowny Dział dla wszystkich Sukcessorow przepisało” [conforming to the former Austrian law, which prescribed an equal share for all successors] (Lipnicki 40/1811). A canon explains his legacy to the church by the rule that „gdy z przepisow Rządowych, należy Czwarta Część Kościołowi” [since under government regulations a fourth part is due to the Church] (Szaniawski 302/1828). A change of currency is a legal matter too: property is converted „podług praw teraźnieyszych Ewaluacyą Bankocetli na Srebrną Monetę” [according to the present laws, by revaluing bank-notes into silver coin] (Mościcki 88/1814), and a father compensates his daughter for a dowry once paid in bank-notes that had since lost their value (Szaniawski 422/1811).

Conclusion: codified law — the Napoleonic Code and, in an act of 1834, also the civil code of the Kingdom of Poland (Chojnacki 180/1834) — is present in the very structure of the acts: in the notions of the disposable and the reserved portion, of descendants and ascendants, of the natural guardian and the subrogate guardian (opiekun przydany), of the publication of a private will. Testators, however, rarely cite articles; knowledge of the law is supplied by the notary and the court (Modrzewski 56/1826; Roguski 375/1835).

Reservations. More than half the acts — 244 (54 %) — contain no reservations at all (Szaniawski 527/1812). The most common are usufruct for life — 78 (17 %) — and substitution or a condition in the event of the heir's death — 48 (11 %) (Szaniawski 389/1812). Revocability is expressed by two kinds of reservation, each found in 30 (7 %) acts. In the first, the disposition lapses if the testator recovers: „Jeżeli Pan Bog Zeznawaiącego przywroci do zdrowia, niniejsza Dyspozycya żadnego znaczenia mieć nie będzie” [should the Lord God restore the declarant to health, the present disposition shall be of no effect] (Szaniawski 435/1813). In the second, the testator reserves the right to change it, in Mościcki's records with the formula „zostawuie sobie moc w każdym Czasie odmienienia, lub Całkiem odwołania tego Testamentu” [he reserves the power to alter or wholly revoke this will at any time] (Mościcki 220/1812). The first form prevails in Łuków, the second in Siedlce (Szaniawski 6/1814; Mościcki 154/1812).

Less common reservations concern maintenance, dowries, concord among the heirs and remembrance of the soul (Szaniawski 219/1816). A father enjoins concord on his children „pod Błogosławieństwem Oycowskim” [under his fatherly blessing] (Szaniawski 20/1813) or binds them „pod niebłogosławieństwem moim” [on pain of losing my blessing] (Modrzewski 263/1826), and a mother summons anyone who opposes her will „Na Straszny Sąd P. Boga” [to the dread judgement of the Lord God] (Chojnacki 5/1823). Sons are to see that „żadnych napotem Kłótni, ani Prawa między sobą nie wszczynali” [they start no quarrels or lawsuits among themselves hereafter] (Roguski 466/1835). In Grabowski's wills disputes between the sons are to be settled by their mother, since „udawać się do Sądów Kraiowych nie będą mogli, Lecz matka takowe rozstrzygać Ma” [they may not resort to the courts of the land, but their mother is to settle such matters] (Chojnacki 52/1834).

Disinheritance. Exclusion of a person from inheritance occurs in 27 (6 %) dispositive acts (Szaniawski 569/1816). Only 5 (1 %) justify it by ingratitude, ill-treatment or misconduct. A wife excludes her husband „dla niewdzięczności, dopuszczania się Srogości zbrodni, ciężkich Obelg na moiey Osobie” [for ingratitude, for committing cruelty and crime, for grievous insults to my person] (Mościcki 259/1811), another because „od Tego Złego Traktowania doświadczałam[?]” [I suffered this ill-treatment at his hands] (Witkowski 298/1815). A mother disinherits an illegitimate son „z powodu nieuszanowania” [for want of respect] (Modrzewski 136/1831); an unmarried woman from Sołdy disinherits the successors of Jakub Borkowski, whose kinship to her is uncertain, because they „w cięższey słabości i domu Swego oddalili” [turned her out of their house when she was gravely ill] (Modrzewski 27/1832); and a parish priest threatens his nephews with exclusion should they fall into misconduct (Witkowski 208/1812). Outside these acts, in an act revoking a will, a mother excludes her legitimate daughter, Ludwika Krasuska, wife of Mikołaj Sadkowski, because „niewdzięcznemi będąc, rożne przykrości Matce swey czynią” [being ungrateful, they cause their mother various vexations] (Szaniawski 169/1818). Ingratitude did not always end in disinheritance: Franciszek Rola of Olszewnica Wielka calls his daughter ungrateful, „bo mnie w nayważnieyszey słabości odstąpiła” [for she abandoned me in my gravest illness], and yet leaves her five hundred złoty and a cow (Chojnacki 32/1834).

In 11 (2 %) acts the person excluded is someone who has already received his share — „iuż prze zemnie zupełnie zaspokoionym został” [he has already been fully satisfied by me] (Roguski 320/1835; Szaniawski 156/1823). In 13 (3 %) the reason is a different one. A Piarist son receives nothing, „iako Zakonnikowi Który na Ubóstwo Ubóstwo przysięga wykonał” [as a religious who has taken a vow of poverty] (Szaniawski 68/1833); another son is left out of the homesteads because „Edukacya iego niemało mnie Kosztowała” [his education cost me no little] (Szaniawski 72/1830); daughters are left out because „przy staraniu Swych Mężów w dobrym zostaią stanie” [thanks to their husbands' efforts they are well provided for] (Szaniawski 11/1832).

Conclusion: disinheritance here is most often a matter of accounting, not of punishment — the closing of accounts with children who had been provided for earlier. In the dispositive acts punitive disinheritance is aimed at husbands, more distant relatives and an illegitimate son; a legitimate child is excluded for ingratitude by a mother in an act of revocation (Szaniawski 169/1818), and a father who complains of an ungrateful daughter does not take away her legacy (Chojnacki 32/1834).

5. Heirs

The circle of heirs. Among the appointed heirs, children appear most often — in 244 (54 %) acts — followed by the spouse — in 129 (29 %) (Szaniawski 422/1811). More distant relatives, siblings, in-laws, grandchildren and parents appear far less often, strangers only exceptionally (Szaniawski 274/1813). In 52 (12 %) acts the testator appoints no heir and only distributes legacies (Szaniawski 348/1812). The most common arrangement is descendants alone — 187 (42 %); next come the spouse alone — 56 (12 %) — and the spouse together with descendants — 49 (11 %) (Szaniawski 389/1812). Children inherit more often in Łuków — 121 (60 %) — than in Siedlce — 123 (50 %) (Szaniawski 160/1817). In Szczawiński's records as many as 10 (20 %) acts name no heir (Szczawiński 22/1832).

Husbands and wives. The husband is the sole heir of a testatrix in 34 (8 %) acts, the wife the sole heir of a testator in 22 (5 %), even though there are more than twice as many men as women among the testators (Roguski 79/1837; Szaniawski 138/1831). Women explain their legacies to their husbands by gratitude — „za przychylne i zgodne pożycie” [for a kind and harmonious married life] (Roguski 103/1836) or for „Prace y Expensa w chorobie” [his labour and expense during my illness] (Szaniawski 46/1824). Men thank their wives „jako wspólnie przez całe Życie zemną pracuiącey” [as one who has worked alongside me all my life] (Roguski 53/1837) and „w nagrodę Jey przywiązania, pracy, i szczególnego zachowania Zdrowia mego” [in reward for her devotion, her work and her particular care of my health] (Szaniawski 507/1832). Legacies to a spouse are more frequent in Łuków — 82 (40 %) acts — than in Siedlce — 56 (23 %) (Szaniawski 422/1811).

Sons and daughters. Where there are several heirs, their shares are unequal or assigned in specific properties in 146 (32 %) acts and equal in 115 (26 %); there is a single heir in 123 (27 %) (Szaniawski 553/1812). A common pattern is land for the sons and money with livestock for the daughters, paid out by the brothers. A father lays on his sons the duty „ażeby Córkom moim a Siostrom swoim wypłacili na posag Złpol: Pięcset” [to pay my daughters, their sisters, five hundred złoty each as a dowry] (Szaniawski 34/1831), and denies his married daughters any further claims (Roguski 273/1836; Roguski 297/1836). Testators say plainly that they do not want the land divided: „Niechcąc Majątku moiego drobnić, y Tenże w Naturze Rozdzielać” [not wishing to fragment my property or divide it in kind] (Szaniawski 139/1828), „niechcę Cząsteczek tak małych, iakie Wnukom zapisałem dzielić na drobnieysze” [I do not wish such small parcels as I have bequeathed to my grandchildren to be divided into smaller ones] (Szaniawski 68/1833). Alongside this the principle of equal division survives, daughters included. A widow from Siedlce divides her property „Czworgu Dzieciom moym na Rowny podział” [among my four children in equal shares] (Witkowski 85/1816), and a widower from near Seroczyn evens out the portions of his sons and daughters with sums of money (Modrzewski 426/1834). There are intermediate solutions too: Kacper Zakrzewski gives his son the homestead with its buildings and apiary, and divides the rest of the land equally between him and four daughters (Szaniawski 118/1828).

Testators also explain inequalities. A son who had worked alongside his father receives something extra „w Nagrodę Pracy Jego około Gospodarstwa blisko przez lat Dwadzieścia czynioney” [in reward for his work on the farm over nearly twenty years] (Szaniawski 139/1828). In the disposition of the Wyrzykowski couple the younger son receives more, because the elder had cost his parents his education (Witkowski 119/1813). Marianna Skolimowska, „maiąc wzgląd na Ciemnotę Oczu Syna mego Jana Skolimowskiego” [having regard to the blindness of my son Jan Skolimowski], leaves three thousand złoty to his children, her grandchildren: Agnieszka, Zofia, Helena and Adam (Witkowski 42/1813); a father makes separate provision for a crippled son (Chojnacki 14/1826). The division could change while the act was being written. Jan Skolimowski of Skolimów Wojnów began by assigning Skolimów to his son and Nowosielec and Kamionki to his daughters, and then, in the notary's presence, ordered an equal division among his three children (Chojnacki 121/1826).

Conclusion: in small gentry holdings two principles collide — equal division, which testators speak of as a command of the law (Witkowski 85/1816; Lipnicki 40/1811), and keeping the farm in a single pair of hands (Szaniawski 139/1828). The way out is to pay off the daughters in money and livestock.

Grandchildren, unborn children, natural children. Grandchildren usually inherit in place of a deceased parent (Szaniawski 219/1816; Roguski 168/1834). The heir may be a child not yet born: a testator who „spodziewa się mieć po sobie zostawionego” [expects to leave after him] a successor secures that child's share (Lipnicki 108/1811; Mościcki 142/1812), and pregnant testatrices make a legacy to the husband depend on whether the child is born and survives (Olędzki 152/1817; Chojnacki 112/1833). Natural children are mentioned in 4 (1 %) acts. Teodor Smogorzewski leaves a homestead „Maryannie Corce swoiey naturalney, z Małgorzatą Kwiatkowską spłodzoney” [to Maryanna, his natural daughter, begotten with Małgorzata Kwiatkowska] (Szaniawski 98/1812); an estate steward makes his heirs four children „Które za własne dzieci swoie przyznaię” [whom I acknowledge as my own children] (Szaniawski 105/1832); Michał Wilczyński leaves everything „Synowi moiemu Naturalnemu z niegdy Barbarą Karwowską spłodzonemu” [to my natural son begotten with the late Barbara Karwowska] (Roguski 333/1836). In the fourth act a mother disinherits an illegitimate son (Modrzewski 136/1831). Outside this table there is also a will in which the testator acknowledges a boy with the words „a do Nazwiska mego przyznawam go” [and I acknowledge him as bearing my name] (Olędzki 86/1817).

The childless. Where there are no children, the property goes to siblings and nephews, and sometimes to in-laws or strangers (Szaniawski 707/1817; Szaniawski 140/1823; Chojnacki 28/1824). Testators describe their situation in words close to those of the Code: „nie mam zstępnych ani wstępnych w linii prostey” [I have no descendants or ascendants in the direct line] (Mościcki 19/1813), „nie mam żadnych Dzieci, ani Stępnych” [I have no children and no descendants] (Roguski 15/1837). Sometimes the tone is more personal: „niemaiąc zaś Dzieci ani z Familij Krewnych do Siebie przychylnych” [having no children, nor any relatives in the family well disposed towards me] (Roguski 77/1834). Strangers inherit only exceptionally — a woman for whom the testator felt „szczególne przywiązanie, wdzięczność y obowiązki” [particular attachment, gratitude and obligation], a neighbour, an executor (Mościcki 28/1813; Witkowski 16/1813; Mościcki 63/1814).

Servants and household. Legacies to servants sometimes let us follow the lives of people who themselves seldom found their way into the records. Canon Jezierski leaves „Jackowi Lemieszkowi Lat Siedem u mnie służącemu za wierne i przychylne usługi Złotych Polskich Tysiąc” [to Jacek Lemieszek, who has served me seven years, for faithful and devoted service, one thousand Polish złoty] (Szaniawski 569/1816). Three years later Jacenty Lemieszek, the canon's former servant, staying in Łuków for medical treatment, makes his own will and refers to this legacy; he divides his modest property between his wife and his little daughter, then in her second year (Szaniawski 297/1819). Among the great landowners legacies to servants are listed by post — steward, carter, cook, footman, housekeeper — and made conditional on remaining in service until the master's death; those who leave „Prawa do tey Legacyi Mieć Nie będą” [shall have no right to this legacy] (Chojnacki 55/1834).

Usufruct for life and maintenance. Usufruct for life for the spouse appears in 123 (27 %) acts, for another person — most often the testator himself or a parent — in 37 (8 %) (Szaniawski 389/1812). The spouse's usufruct is more frequent in Łuków — 63 (31 %) — than in Siedlce — 60 (24 %); in Siedlce usufruct for another person is more frequent, because there are more dispositions of property among children with usufruct reserved for the parents (Witkowski 16/1816; Modrzewski 119/1835). A widow loses her usufruct or the interest if she remarries — „ieżeliby za mąż po=szła przed Dożywocie wszystkie traci” [should she marry, she loses the whole usufruct] (Szaniawski 296/1820) — and a testatrix sets the same condition for her husband (Chojnacki 112/1833).

Parents reserve for themselves an allowance in grain (ordynaria) — „Zyta Korcy Siedm, Pszenicy Półkorca, Jęczmienia Korcy dwa, Tatarki Korzec Jeden, Grochu półkorca, y owsa Korzec” [seven korzec of rye, half a korzec of wheat, two korzec of barley, one korzec of buckwheat, half a korzec of peas and a korzec of oats] (Modrzewski 37/1830). The child who receives the farm is to see that he „do śmierci dochował, a po zyściu z tego świata pogrzebł” [keeps them until death and buries them when they depart this world] (Modrzewski 35/1830; Modrzewski 6/1835). A daughter receives the largest share because she „zobowiązała się mnie ubogiego i Laty obciążonego, a do tego i Słabością przyciśnionego do Śmierci dochować” [undertook to keep me, poor, weighed down by years and afflicted with infirmity besides, until my death] (Modrzewski 42/1833); a nephew is to look after his uncle in illness (Szaniawski 364/1829), and a widow is to live with her son (Szaniawski 24/1827; Szaniawski 73/1831).

Conclusion: wills and dispositions are also contracts for old age — the property passes to whoever undertakes to keep the parents and bury them (Modrzewski 42/1833; Modrzewski 35/1830).

6. Sums and Property

Currencies. Unambiguous sums in złp (Polish złoty) appear in 292 (65 %) acts; ducats (czerwone złote), thalers, roubles and Rhenish gulden are rare (Szaniawski 569/1816). Ducats belong mainly to 1810–1819 (Witkowski 39/1810), roubles appear only in 1829–1832 (Szczawiński 106/1829; Szaniawski 61/1832), and in 1830–1839 dowries are sometimes stipulated to be paid in silver, in heavy silver coin (Roguski 59/1836; Szczawiński 20/1838).

Orders of magnitude. Secular legacies and dowries with an unambiguous sum in złoty amount to 335 items in 170 acts; the median is 240 złp, the range 6–100000 złp (Szaniawski 348/1812). The median legacy is 300 złp for the nobility, 200 złp for testators without a title and 50 złp for Jewish testators; 200 złp in Łuków and 350 złp in Siedlce (Szaniawski 20/1813). Pious legacies come to 158 items in 75 acts, with a median of 100 złp, and debts to 385 items in 158 acts, with a median of 144 złp (Szaniawski 511/1812). The total of legacies, dowries and pious legacies in a single act has a median of 401 złp; 500 złp for the nobility, 400 złp for testators without a title, 2429 złp for the clergy (Szaniawski 569/1816).

The largest sums are exceptions. Józef Grabowski's estate was valued in his successive wills at 200000–250000 złp (Chojnacki 52/1834; Chojnacki 53/1834), the wife of a former president of the Commission of the Sandomierz Voivodeship leaves her husband 100000 złp (Chojnacki 112/1833), and the dowry of the daughter of a part-owner of Sobole amounts to 20250 złp (Szaniawski 20/1813). Heirs' shares expressed as a sum have a median of 1000 złp, 575 złp in Łuków and 5000 złp in Siedlce (Szaniawski 139/1828; Modrzewski 426/1834).

Declared value. Some acts give an estimate of the whole property, usually as an upper limit: „niewięcey iak Złotych Tysiąc wartować mogący” [worth no more than a thousand złoty] (Szaniawski 138/1831), „złotych polskich Dziewięćset nieprzenosi” [does not exceed nine hundred Polish złoty] (Chojnacki 24/1826), „złotych polskich Ośm Tysięcy nie przenosi” [does not exceed eight thousand Polish złoty] (Chojnacki 121/1826). Some abstracts place the estimate of the property directly beside the stamp duty (Szczawiński 27/1830; Modrzewski 245/1833); others record, for private wills, the collateral stamp duty, the cancellation of stamped paper and the penalty for its absence (Szaniawski 395/1830; Modrzewski 209/1827).

What was inherited. Besides land and money, wills distribute livestock — oxen, cows, sheep, mares, pigs — as well as grain, bedding, clothing and household goods (Szaniawski 1/1817). Sources of income are also handed on: an inn and a windmill, from which the guardians are to „z propinowania Trunków i z Młynu Dzieci i Żonę moię utrzy mywać” [maintain my children and wife from the retail of liquor and from the mill] (Szaniawski 184/1829), the lease of an inn (Roguski 37/1834), stalls and shops beneath the town hall (Szaniawski 20/1818; Chojnacki 41/1827), a brickworks (Modrzewski 269/1826), beehives (Roguski 15/1837), a craftsman's tools (Szaniawski 11/1832) and libraries (Chojnacki 184/1826).

Debts and pledges. Active debts are listed in 164 (36 %) acts, passive debts in 117 (26 %), and half the acts — 226 (50 %) — list no debts (Szaniawski 348/1812). Active debts are more frequent in Łuków — 90 (44 %) — than in Siedlce — 74 (30 %) (Szaniawski 20/1813). The capital of the petty gentry circulates in the form of pledge sums: money lent to neighbours and relatives against a pledge of land, and land held in pledge until redeemed (Szaniawski 316/1816; Modrzewski 105/1826). Jews, among them leaseholders of inns (arendarze), also appear as creditors and debtors (Mościcki 80/1812; Chojnacki 53/1838).

Conclusion: the typical will in this corpus disposes of modest property — legacies of a few hundred złoty, a head or two of cattle and a piece of land. The large sums belong to a few landed and official families, almost exclusively from the Siedlce chanceries, and it is they who push up the Siedlce medians (Chojnacki 53/1834; Chojnacki 112/1833). The declared value of the property probably served to assess the fee and need not match its real worth. The lists of debts, on the other hand, reveal a network of neighbourly credit — who lent to whom, and whose land was held in pledge by whom — and make it possible to reconstruct ties between the families of one district (Szaniawski 316/1816; Szaniawski 521/1832).

7. Pious Legacies and Burial

Frequency and change. A pious legacy appears in 119 (26 %) dispositive acts — in Łuków in 58 (29 %), in Siedlce in 61 (25 %) (Szaniawski 348/1812). Their share falls over time: from 62 (35 %) in 1810–1819 to 25 (16 %) in 1830–1839. In Łuków the fall is steep, from 32 (42 %) to 8 (12 %), in Siedlce gentler, from 30 (30 %) to 17 (18 %) (Lipnicki 268/1811; Szczawiński 22/1832). It can already be seen within Szaniawski's own acts, from 24 (36 %) in 1810–1819 to 8 (22 %) in 1830–1839 (Szaniawski 535/1818; Szaniawski 296/1826). His successor Roguski has not a single pious legacy, whereas Lipnicki has them in 8 (73 %) acts (Roguski 59/1836; Lipnicki 4/1811). Clergy make pious legacies in 10 (77 %) acts, the nobility in 56 (23 %), testators without a title in 42 (28 %) (Szaniawski 569/1816).

Recipients. The most frequent recipients are the parish church and its clergy — 65 (14 %) acts — followed by religious orders — 37 (8 %) — and the poor and hospitals — 23 (5 %) (Szaniawski 98/1812). Religious orders are more frequent in Łuków than in Siedlce; the most often named recipients in the whole corpus are the Bernardines and the Piarists of Łuków (Szaniawski 511/1812). Testators from both towns also leave legacies to the Paulines at Leśna (Witkowski 16/1813), the Reformati at Biała (Lipnicki 268/1811), the Marians at Skórzec (Szaniawski 707/1817) and the Carmelites at Wola Gułowska (Szaniawski 152/1828). Among parish churches, Trzebieszów, Zbuczyn, Ulan, Skórzec, Seroczyn and Mordy recur (e.g. Witkowski 208/1812; Olędzki 135/1817). Jewish testators leave money to the synagogue, the school and the poor of their own faith, e.g. „Na potrzeby Bożnicze czyli Szkolne, Hebrayskie Łukowskie Złotych Dziewięćdziesiąt” [ninety złoty for the needs of the Hebrew synagogue or school of Łuków] (Szaniawski 62/1826; Mościcki 146/1815).

Purposes. A pious legacy serves above all for masses and services for the soul — 85 (19 %) acts — and for the funeral — 61 (14 %); less often for alms and for the building, repair or furnishing of a church (Szaniawski 258/1825; Olędzki 183/1819). Services are ordered for years ahead: with vigils for three years (Szaniawski 394/1819), with the provision „aby przez trzy Lata trzyrazy w roku odprawiane były Exekwie i Żałobne nabożeństwo za Duszę moię” [that exequies and a requiem service for my soul be held three times a year for three years] (Szaniawski 308/1828), for twenty years (Szaniawski 152/1828) or in perpetuity (Chojnacki 53/1838). In one Łuków will each of the churches remembered is to receive an offering „na Modlitwy tak zwane przypominki” [for the prayers known as przypominki, remembrances of the dead] (Szaniawski 507/1832). An animal to be sold is often set aside for the funeral — „Wołu Czarnego na Pogrzeb Sprzedać Testator dysponuie” [the testator directs that the black ox be sold for the funeral] (Szaniawski 122/1818) — and a pair of draught oxen goes to the parish priest (Lipnicki 164/1811; Szaniawski 316/1818). Alms may be given in kind: shirts for the poor (Szaniawski 126/1825), or an ox for a meal for the poor, „a to wołu naylepszego” [and that the best ox] (Chojnacki 108/1825).

The richest set of pious legacies is that of Canon Jan Jezierski: hospitals for the poor in several parishes, the completion of the church at Adamów, and masses „za omyłki i niepamięci, ktore się trafić mogły w życiu moim” [for the errors and omissions that may have occurred in my life] (Szaniawski 569/1816). The parish priest of Zbuczyn wants „Księży przy pogrzebie moim było Dwunastu” [twelve priests at my funeral], and remits the arrears of tithe owed by the poor gentry „aby pamięć mey Duszy mieli” [so that they remember my soul] (Witkowski 273/1816).

New forms of charity. From 1820–1829 onwards, public institutions appear in Siedlce alongside the churches: a fund for pupils of the provincial schools, a charitable fund in Lublin and a public library (Chojnacki 184/1826), the library of the Siedlce school (Olędzki 17/1821), the Savings Society of the Kingdom of Poland for the benefit of old servants (Szczawiński 54/1829), the Podlasie Charitable Society (Szczawiński 26/1837) and the Institute for the Deaf and Dumb in Warsaw (Chojnacki 53/1838). A former captain from Mordy leaves a sum in perpetuity „Dla Ubogich Wdów Sierot i wstydzących się prosić” [for poor widows, orphans and those ashamed to beg] (Chojnacki 11/1834).

The funeral. A funeral disposition appears in 212 (47 %) acts — in Łuków in 113 (56 %), in Siedlce in 99 (40 %) (Szaniawski 389/1812). In both towns its share falls: in Łuków from 51 (66 %) in 1810–1819 to 28 (43 %) in 1830–1839, in Siedlce from 47 (47 %) to 27 (29 %) (Szaniawski 72/1830). Most often no place of burial is given — 151 (34 %) acts; the parish church is named in 34 (8 %), a cemetery in 12 (3 %) (Witkowski 41/1813). In 1830–1839 the cemetery appears more distinctly — „aby na Cmentarzu przy Kościele w Ziemi pochowane było” [that it be buried in the earth in the churchyard] (Szczawiński 22/1832) — but the numbers are too small to speak of a change. For the genealogist a funeral disposition may be the only clue to the parish: several abstracts establish the parish solely from the place of burial (Witkowski 8/1812; Szczawiński 52/1832; Modrzewski 72/1836), which should be treated as an indication, not a certainty.

Funeral instructions most often concern costs — 63 (14 %) — and masses, exequies and vigils — 53 (12 %); modesty is enjoined in 22 (5 %) acts (Szaniawski 511/1812). The canon asks for a funeral „bez żadney okazałości (oprócz nayliczniejszego Nabożeństwa za Duszę moię)” [without any display (save for the most numerous services for my soul)] (Szaniawski 569/1816). In 1826 Wojciech Karwowski of Zarzec Ulański repeats these words almost verbatim — „bez żadney Okazałości Oprócz Nayliczniejszego Nabożeństwa za Duszę moią” [the same words] — and itemises the costs himself: a catafalque, twelve candles and twelve lamps, a coffin, a shirt and trousers, the procession and exequies, a sung mass, and the knell fee „Organiście y Dziadom” [to the organist and the beggars] (Szaniawski 296/1826). The attorney (patron) Tarnawski asks that his body be „bez żadney Pompy y Ceremonij chowane ponieważ iestem biedny” [buried without any pomp or ceremony, since I am poor] (Chojnacki 297/1823); a former soldier, that he be buried „choćby bez Trumny iako ubogiego Polskiego Żołnierza” [even without a coffin, as a poor Polish soldier] (Chojnacki 12/1834); a former captain, that he be laid in his uniform in a coffin that „ma bydź nie Kosztowna Czarno farbą pomalowana” [is to be inexpensive, painted black] (Chojnacki 11/1834). A funeral meal is ordered „w Domu moim” [in my house] (Mościcki 80/1812) or as „Obiadziku żałobnego za Dusze Zmarłych” [a small funeral meal for the souls of the dead] (Szaniawski 297/1820). Often, however, the funeral itself is left to the family, with the formula „Pogrzeb Ciała mego Staranności Żony moiey polecam” [I commend the burial of my body to the care of my wife] (Szaniawski 130/1824).

Conclusion: in 1810–1839 the religious framing of the act grows weaker — the share of pious legacies and funeral dispositions declines — but with chanceries as different as Szaniawski's and Roguski's it is hard to separate a change of custom from a change of formulary (Szaniawski 507/1832; Roguski 279/1835). Legacies to secular institutions are a Siedlce phenomenon. They are made mainly by officials, officers and landowners, but also by a petty nobleman from Siedlce and an illiterate manor servant (Szczawiński 26/1837; Szczawiński 54/1829); in Łuków charity stays within the bounds of parish and monastery (Szaniawski 140/1823). The sample is small and does not allow us to speak of a trend.

8. Guardianship and Executors

Executors. An executor of the will is appointed in 86 (19 %) acts — more often in Siedlce, 57 (23 %), than in Łuków, 29 (14 %) (Szaniawski 348/1812). In Łuków their share falls from 19 (25 %) in 1810–1819 to 3 (5 %) in 1830–1839, and Roguski has none at all (Lipnicki 268/1811; Roguski 466/1835). An executor is named by 9 (69 %) clerical testators, but by only 38 (15 %) noblemen and by none of the Jewish testators (Szaniawski 356/1822; Szaniawski 489/1819). The executor is more often an outsider — a friend, neighbour or official — 49 (11 %), than a member of the family — 35 (8 %) (Szaniawski 396/1813; Witkowski 44/1813); usually there is one, and two or three are rare (Szaniawski 394/1819; Szaniawski 569/1816).

Among the executors are the notary of the Łuków district (Szaniawski 396/1813), a judge of the Tribunal, the mayor of Garwolin and the president of the town of Siedlce (Modrzewski 131/1831; Szczawiński 122/1835), and the prefect of the department (Mościcki 259/1811). A testator asks his friends to be „pilnemi Strożami Woli moiey” [diligent guardians of my will] (Szaniawski 191/1818), or a neighbour „aby był czułym Strożem nad Wykonaniem Woli Moiey ostateczney” [to keep a watchful eye over the execution of my last will] (Szaniawski 215/1821). The office could be declined: the clergymen named by Canon Jezierski renounced it, pleading their duties and a populous parish of „naymniey Sześć Tysięcy Ludności” [at least six thousand souls] (Szaniawski 454/1818; Szaniawski 461/1818). Executors receive a reward (Szaniawski 302/1828; Chojnacki 298/1823).

Guardians. A guardian for the children or the wife is appointed in 108 (24 %) acts — in Siedlce in 63 (26 %), in Łuków in 45 (22 %); in Łuków in 1830–1839 in only 8 (12 %) (Szaniawski 98/1812). The guardian is most often the testator's wife, the children's mother — 58 (13 %) acts — then a relative or in-law — 51 (11 %) — a subrogate guardian, adviser or co-guardian — 45 (10 %) — and an outsider — 41 (9 %) (Szaniawski 389/1812). A testatrix's husband takes this role in only 5 (1 %) acts; once he is the stepfather of the testatrix's children from her first marriage, once their father (Szczawiński 18/1829; Szczawiński 42/1829). The abstracts do not say why women testators so rarely appoint anyone. One may suppose that while the children's father was alive there was no need, but that is a supposition, not something the acts say.

The subrogate guardian appears mainly in Siedlce — in 37 (15 %) acts against 8 (4 %) in Łuków. The chanceries of Witkowski and Mościcki use the language of the Code: the wife is the natural guardian, and beside her acts the subrogate guardian (Witkowski 15/1813; Mościcki 18/1813). The mayor of Siedlce is made a subrogate guardian (Witkowski 240/1812), as are a judge of the Tribunal (Szaniawski 150/1824) and a former president of Łuków (Szaniawski 236/1824). A family council appears in only 3 (1 %) acts (Witkowski 66/1813; Olędzki 142/1817; Szczawiński 129/1830). How the arrangement worked in practice is shown by the post-mortem inventory of Stanisław Wąż, land judge of Drohiczyn. One of the guardians named in his will had died and the other, the testator's brother, had declined; the family council entrusted the guardianship to the widow, and a justice of the peace became subrogate guardian (Olędzki 17/1819).

In Łuków the guardian is usually a relative, often acting alongside the wife: a full brother (Szaniawski 163/1818; Szaniawski 199/1819), an elder brother living in Radzyń (Szaniawski 208/1819), a father-in-law appointed „za Wspolnego Opiekuna” [as joint guardian] with the testator's wife (Szaniawski 94/1821), an adult son for his younger siblings (Szaniawski 92/1815; Roguski 59/1836). Such appointments are valuable evidence of kinship, but the abstracts sometimes mark the guardian's relationship with a question mark — brother-in-law, the children's maternal uncle, paternal uncle (Szaniawski 129/1818; Szaniawski 359/1824; Szaniawski 206/1819) — and that mark must not be lost.

The wording of guardianship says a good deal about the family. A father appoints his wife „iako Matkę i Opiekunkę Sierot” [as mother and guardian of the orphans] (Szaniawski 206/1819); another asks two craftsmen that after his death they „raczyli bydź moiey Kochaney Żonie Doradzami i Obiekunami” [be so kind as to act as advisers and guardians to my dear wife] (Chojnacki 12/1834). There is mistrust as well. A testatrix keeps her husband away from the guardianship because „moy Mąż, źle się rządzi, y niespodziewam się, aby był dobrym Opiekunem” [my husband conducts himself badly, and I do not expect him to be a good guardian] (Szaniawski 236/1824); a father writes that „ani Żona moia, ani moy Brat nie są zdatnemi utrzymywać Opiekę” [neither my wife nor my brother is fit to carry on the guardianship] (Szaniawski 184/1829); another appoints an adviser for his wife because she „mniey iest usposobiona do prowadzenia takowey Opieki” [is less suited to conducting such a guardianship] (Chojnacki 180/1834). Guardians are to see to education — a testator tells his wife „Appolinarowi Synowi dać pomoc Edukacyi” [to give our son Appolinary help with his education] (Szaniawski 208/1819) — and to the property of family members who are away, a son or a brother gone to the army (Witkowski 85/1816; Witkowski 315/1816).

Conclusion: in the Siedlce chanceries guardianship is arranged according to the Code, with the mother as guardian and a subrogate guardian beside her (Witkowski 41/1813; Mościcki 18/1813); in Łuków the children are more often simply entrusted to the wife, a brother or a friend, „Dobremu y doświadczonemu Przyiacielowi swoiemu” [to his good and experienced friend] (Szaniawski 20/1820).

Witnesses. Four witnesses appear in 263 (58 %) acts, two in 71 (16 %) (Szaniawski 511/1812). In wills written down by the notary there are four witnesses in 238 (72 %), two in 52 (16 %) (Szaniawski 553/1812). Here too the chanceries differ. In Łuków 148 (73 %) acts have four witnesses, in Siedlce 115 (47 %); in Roguski's records 27 (93 %) (Roguski 118/1835). Witkowski makes do with two in 21 (49 %) acts, Lipnicki in 8 (73 %), while Szczawiński most often has five — 18 (37 %) (Witkowski 41/1813; Lipnicki 268/1811; Szczawiński 12/1829). It remains an open question whether the two witnesses at the public wills of Witkowski and Lipnicki mean that a second notary also signed the act — the Code allowed a public will to be made before two notaries and two witnesses, or before one notary and four witnesses — given that the abstracts mention no second notary (Witkowski 42/1813; Lipnicki 268/1811). Holographic wills have no witnesses at all in 7 (26 %) cases (Chojnacki 297/1823; Szczawiński 113/1838).

The witnesses are neighbours from the same locality, often bearing the testator's own surname (Lipnicki 4/1811; Roguski 501/1835), town officials — the mayor, a bailiff, a court usher (Szaniawski 212/1825; Roguski 37/1834) — craftsmen in the town (Mościcki 38/1810) or, as in one will written at Jasionka, six „Swiadkow a Gospodarzy Osiadłych” [witnesses, being settled farmers] (Szczawiński 39/1830). They were not always easy to gather. At one of Mościcki's wills it was noted that witnesses were hard to find, because the candidates were relatives or could not write (Mościcki 15/1811). A testatrix's uncle refused to sign so as not to fall out with her brothers (Lipnicki 40/1811). A witness might also be the testator's debtor or creditor (Szaniawski 350/1814; Szaniawski 184/1829).

9. Links with Other Acts

What the acts refer to. Among the dispositive acts, 209 (46 %) mention no other act (Szaniawski 422/1811). The rest refer most often to contracts, pledges, documents and entries in the land records — 116 (26 %), then to marriage settlements and provisions between spouses — 50 (11 %) — and to an earlier will, the testator's own or someone else's — 46 (10 %) (Szaniawski 348/1812). Less often they cite judgments and settlements, partitions, mortgages, an inventory or an auction (Szaniawski 511/1812). Marriage settlements are more frequent in Łuków — 29 (14 %) against 21 (9 %) in Siedlce — and mortgages in Siedlce — 17 (7 %) against 3 (1 %) in Łuków (Witkowski 22/1813). Testators ask for the disposition to be entered in the mortgage records — „aby było do Akt Hypotecznych przyięte” [that it be admitted to the mortgage records] (Szaniawski 297/1820; Mościcki 13/1813). Across the corpus as a whole an earlier will is cited in 86 (17 %) acts, among them all the revocations and more than half of the derivative acts (Szaniawski 262/1814; Szaniawski 518/1818).

Old books and the names of the office. Wills reach back to records from before the notarial era. They cite the Łuków land records of the last years of the eighteenth century and the first years of the nineteenth (Szaniawski 18/1813), a husband's provision entered „w Aktach Grodu Łukowskiego, Dnia Dziewiętnastego Lutego” [in the records of the Łuków castle court, on the nineteenth of February] in the eighteenth century (Szaniawski 328/1825), an entry made „przed Aktami Ziemi Łukowskiey Za byłego Rządu Austryackiego” [before the records of the Łuków land court under the former Austrian government] (Witkowski 84/1815) and a transaction entered by oblata in the Drohiczyn land records (Witkowski 31/1815). A receipt of 1818 settles sums under the will of Joachim Zaleski, made „Testamentem Dnia Szesnastego Marca, Tysiąc Siedemset Siedemdziesiąt Ósmego Roku” [by a will of the sixteenth of March, seventeen hundred and seventy-eight] and entered in the castle courts of Brześć Kujawski and Łuków (Szaniawski 518/1818). For the genealogist these are pointers to the dates and places of entries that can be looked for in the castle-court and land-court books.

The name of the office changes as well. In 1811 Wiktor Witkowski appears as a registrar of acts: „Dokumentem uczynionym przez Wiel: Wiktora Witkowskiego Pisarza Aktowego Departamentu Siedleckiego” [by a document executed before the Honourable Wiktor Witkowski, registrar of acts of the Siedlce Department] (Lipnicki 278/1811). A private will of 1822 was written „tak iakoby stanowszy przed Aktami W. Pisarza Publicznego W. Ludwika Modrzewskiego” [as though appearing before the records of the Honourable Ludwik Modrzewski, public notary] (Chojnacki 5/1823). By the thirties people speak of a rejent or regent: a testator asks for his will to be kept by „W.go Regenta Modrzewskiego” [the Honourable Regent Modrzewski] (Chojnacki 12/1834), and an act of 1834 mentions a pledge contracted in 1815 „przed Rejentem Ur: Józefem Kalasantym Szaniawskim” [before the notary Józef Kalasanty Szaniawski] (Roguski 38/1834). In 1835–1836 Roguski's acts refer to transactions concluded earlier „przed niegdy Józefem Kalasantym Szaniawskim” [before the late Józef Kalasanty Szaniawski] (Roguski 118/1835; Roguski 46/1836), and a notary of the Łuków district of that name was executor of one of the wills in 1813 (Szaniawski 396/1813). In the language of these acts the word „niegdy” [late, formerly] usually denotes a deceased person, but the date of the notary's death has to be established from other sources.

Pairs of acts within the corpus. The cross-reference table detects 16 cross-references linking 20 acts of the corpus. Most often they link a will with its later revocation; there are seven such pairs, e.g. (Szaniawski 435/1813; Szaniawski 262/1814) or (Szczawiński 122/1835; Szczawiński 120/1836). Canon Jezierski's will and codicil are linked with two renunciations by his executors (Szaniawski 454/1818; Szaniawski 461/1818). The will of Zuzanna Wierzchowska of Paskudy refers to the will of Mateusz Wierzchowski of the same locality, but the text does not say whether she was his widow (Szaniawski 317/1818; Szaniawski 316/1818). The notes in the abstracts point to further pairs that the table does not count: a will and its revocation in Mościcki's records (Mościcki 19/1813; Mościcki 124/1813), a will, its acceptance by the family and a codicil (Szaniawski 139/1828; Szaniawski 152/1828), a will and the wife's acceptance of a legacy (Lipnicki 108/1811; Lipnicki 195/1811). Zuzanna Niewęgłowska of Siedlce replaced her will with a new one within the same year, expressly revoking the earlier one (Mościcki 6/1814; Mościcki 23/1814). Katarzyna née Gołaska, deserted by her husband, revokes her will with the help of a curator, and her first husband's surname is spelt differently in her two acts (Szaniawski 650/1817; Szaniawski 169/1818).

Probable links. Several other pairs are connected only by circumstantial evidence and must be treated accordingly. A contract of 1815 for the sale of a share in Krasusy Gołowierzchy cites the will of Mikołaj Krasuski made at Pogonów before Witkowski, but dated „Dnia Trzydziestego Listopada, Tysiąc osiemset Siedemnastego Roku” [the thirtieth of November, eighteen hundred and seventeen], that is, later than the contract itself; the sellers are the Kisielińscy (Szaniawski 328/1815). The corpus contains the will of Mikołaj Krasuski Wroniec, made at Pogonów, with an extract issued to Katarzyna Ki[?]lińska (Witkowski 318/1811). This is therefore probably the same will, and the year in the reading of the contract is wrong — a point to be checked in the manuscript. Antoni Smyk, village headman of Sięciaszka, leaves land to his nephew Stanisław, and a year later Stanisław Smyk of the same house at Łapiguz makes his own will, partly before the same witnesses (Szaniawski 364/1829; Szaniawski 78/1830). Franciszka Borkowska, housekeeper to Mateusz Syroczyński, revokes a legacy to her uncle, and in the same year Syroczyński leaves her a cow and money; both acts were drawn up in the same house in Długa Street (Witkowski 12/1810; Witkowski 39/1810). Onufry Jastrzębski, a debtor of Judge Klimaszewski, makes his own will in the same year (Chojnacki 184/1826; Chojnacki 221/1826). The parish priest of Seroczyn appears once as Grodzki and once as Grędzki; the second act alters a disposition made „pod Dniem Szostym Sierpnia w Roku Tysiąc Osmset Dwunastym” [on the sixth of August in the year eighteen hundred and twelve], so this is most likely the same person, and the doubt concerns only the form of the surname (Witkowski 208/1812; Witkowski 443/1817).

Three revocations made before later notaries point to wills that may be in the corpus. Wojciech Soszyński of Pióry Wielkie revokes in 1822 a will made in 1812 before Mościcki, and Mościcki's records contain a will of his from that year (Chojnacki 83/1822; Mościcki 142/1812). The same holds for Piotr Chojecki of Chojeczno Cesarze (Olędzki 682/1818; Mościcki 202/1811) and for Michał Witkowski, Wielmożny, leaseholder of government estates (Chojnacki 74/1836; Mościcki 166/1816). Forename and surname, year and notary agree, and in the first two cases the locality as well, but the abstracts do not compare the exact date of the revoked act; the identification is probable (?), not certain.

The path of a private will. The abstracts show how a will made at home reached the notary. After the testator's death the Court of Peace sealed the property and found the will — „Testament ten znaleziony został w czasie obsygillacyi” [this will was found during the sealing] (Chojnacki 184/1826; Szaniawski 356/1822) — sometimes in a casket, or in a cupboard in a sealed bag (Olędzki 86/1817; Chojnacki 180/1835). Alternatively the will was brought to the president of the Tribunal by the widow, a son, a son-in-law or the wójt (Modrzewski 105/1826; Szczawiński 54/1829). The president described the condition of the document and published it, which in acts of 1826–1838 was usually recorded with the formula „Ogłoszenie i opisanie Stanu obecnego Testamentu z duchem Artykułu 1007. Kodexu Cywilnego zgodne” [the publication and description of the present state of the will, in keeping with the spirit of that article of the Civil Code] (Szaniawski 92/1832; Chojnacki 128/1838), and then sent the original to the notary for deposit in the records. On this occasion the stamped paper was cancelled and the stamp duty made up (Modrzewski 209/1827; Modrzewski 245/1833). Some testators forbade sealing and inventory in advance: „żadne obsygillacye, Rezygillacye y Inwentacye, Jżby nie następowały” [that no sealing, unsealing or inventories should take place] (Witkowski 97/1816; Chojnacki 161/1828).

Derivative acts. The group of derivative acts shows the afterlife of a will: a wife's acceptance of a legacy (Lipnicki 195/1811), the recognition of a private will by the widow and sons (Mościcki 186/1815), a renunciation of executorship (Szaniawski 454/1818), a receipt for dowry and inheritance sums under an old will (Szaniawski 518/1818). A testatrix withdraws from her will after more than twelve years and hands over her property in return for maintenance (Szaniawski 7/1825). There are post-mortem inventories with a description of the will (Olędzki 17/1819; Szaniawski 386/1819), a notice of an auction of movables (Modrzewski 25/1827), a partition of an inheritance among siblings (Modrzewski 298/1834), and even an account of the daily fees of a clerk and the valuers (Witkowski 19/1813). Extracts of wills were issued to heirs years later, sometimes after more than a decade (Szaniawski 18/1813; Mościcki 154/1812).

Conclusion: a will is one link in a chain of acts — marriage settlement, pledge, partition, inventory, auction, mortgage — and only together with them does it allow us to trace what became of a property and a family (Szaniawski 297/1819; Olędzki 17/1819). The register points to hundreds of such acts that the synthesis does not yet cover.

10. Genealogical and Social Conclusions, and Doubts

What a will tells the genealogist. The abstracts give the testator's parents — son of Wojciech, daughter of Antoni and Katarzyna z Wiembłów — and the mother of the children of each marriage, e.g. „z niegdy Konstancyą Zakrzewską w małżeństwie spłodzonemu” [begotten in marriage with the late Konstancja Zakrzewska] (Szaniawski 316/1816; Szaniawski 318/1818; Szaniawski 422/1811). They record the successive marriages of women and men, with the surnames of first husbands and first wives (Szaniawski 527/1812; Szaniawski 72/1830). Tadeusz Orlewski lists the children of his two marriages separately, and beside a son from the first the abstract notes that he died in 1833 in Nancy (Modrzewski 114/1836). Wills also record deaths and absences: a daughter who died childless (Witkowski 187/1816), a son who died in the army (Modrzewski 100/1830), a son of whom „niewiadomo czy żyie i czy powróci” [it is not known whether he is alive or will return] (Olędzki 659/1818). Katarzyna Jagielska of Dąbrówka Stany leaves her daughters, of whom there has been no word from Ukraine for seventeen years, nothing but her blessing, „Jeżeli Żyią” [if they are alive] (Witkowski 8/1812). The ages of children and mentions of an unborn child make it possible to approximate dates of birth (Szaniawski 359/1824; Olędzki 152/1817). The testator's own age should be taken as a clue rather than a date, since most acts do not give it and the figure is often rounded (Szaniawski 422/1811). For the genealogist the list of witnesses is as valuable as the list of heirs, because it shows the neighbours and kin who were present at a death (Lipnicki 4/1811; Szczawiński 39/1830).

Bynames distinguish families of the same surname in the same district. Among the Krasuscy we find Jan Magdalon (Szaniawski 707/1817), Mikołaj Wroniec (Witkowski 318/1811) and Kasper known as Koranek (Szaniawski 278/1821). Elsewhere we meet Ludwik Celiński Sulejczyk (Szaniawski 310/1821), Jędrzej Rola Bajanek (Szaniawski 198/1828), Kajetan Grochowski known as Michałowicz (Szaniawski 282/1833), Józef Załeski known as Dziecinka (Szaniawski 296/1820), Tomasz Wysokiński Misiewicz (Szaniawski 141/1824), Jan Dębowski Tabusz (Roguski 286/1835), Wojciech Ługowski known as Paziorek (Modrzewski 119/1835) and Michał Paprocki known as Poddawczyk (Mościcki 220/1812).

When linking persons across different acts one must hold on to anchors — parent, spouse, children, byname, locality — for the abstracts themselves show where the traps lie. The wife of Piotr Chojecki of Chojeczno Cesarze, primo voto Wielgorska, is once née Łukowska and once née Żukowska; this is most likely (?) the same person in two readings (Mościcki 202/1811; Chojnacki 254/1824). The first husband of Katarzyna née Gołaska is once Kraszewski and once Krasuski (Szaniawski 650/1817; Szaniawski 169/1818), and the same person may be called the testator's uncle in one place and his brother in another (Olędzki 141/1819; Szczawiński 26/1837).

The Jasieńscy (Jasińscy) and the Jasionka area. The surname Jasieński (Jasiński) appears in 24 acts before 7 notaries, but in only 3 cases is the testator of this family or of this name (Modrzewski 105/1826; Szczawiński 38/1830; Chojnacki 213/1822). Wojciech Jasiński, son of Felicjan, of Plewki, owner of land in Plewki, Tchórzew, Pogonów and Krasusy Zaolszyn, leaves his entire immovable property to his son: „Ogólny móy Maiątek nieruchomy Synowi memu Jędrzejowi Jasińskiemu daię, daruię i Zapisuię” [My entire immovable property I give, donate and bequeath to my son Jędrzej Jasiński]; to his daughters he assigns dowries to be paid by their brother (Modrzewski 105/1826). Of the will of Jakub Jasieński of Jasionka only the covering letter survives; the will was presented by Michał Jasieński, whose relationship to the testator the abstract does not give (Szczawiński 38/1830). Marianna née Pogonowska, primo voto Jasieńska, leaves her property „w połowie iedney Dzieciom moim z pierwszego małżeństwa, Jędrzejowi i Michałowi Jasieńskim” [one half to my children of the first marriage, Jędrzej and Michał Jasieński], and the other half to her second husband and the daughters of her second marriage (Chojnacki 213/1822).

The Jasieńscy appear more often in their neighbours' acts. In 14 acts they are witnesses (Olędzki 11/1821; Witkowski 74/1813); Józef Jasiński, co-owner of Dropie, witnesses the will of the holder of the Cisie estate (Chojnacki 14/1826). Józefa Helena Jasińska is the daughter and heir of Franciszka née Skrzyszowska of Koły, and the testatrix's son-in-law is Aloizy Jasiński (Szaniawski 79/1825). Marianna Wilczyńska née Jasieńska receives from her husband usufruct for life over his whole property (Roguski 168/1834). Kazimierz Jasiński (Jasieński), wójt of the commune — in one act called the commune of Borki Świercze and Jasionka — writes out his neighbours' wills and affirms that he wrote „słowo w słowo z dyspozycyą Testatora” [word for word as the testator directed] (Szczawiński 54/1829; Modrzewski 136/1831). At the private wills from Jasionka and the surrounding area the witnesses are Borkowscy, Jasieńscy, Chromińscy and Radomyscy, and these wills reached the records by way of the Tribunal (Modrzewski 56/1826; Szczawiński 39/1830).

The manor servant Marcin Franopolski preserves the memory of the Jasińscy of Żelków. He orders services for the souls of Leon and Marianna Jasiński, mentions a legacy for his service under the will of „niegdy Wgo Leona Jasińskiego” [the late Honourable Leon Jasiński], paid out — according to the abstract — by his son Kazimierz, and among the sums owed to him lists one secured on the Żelków estate of Marianna née Wodzińska Jasińska (Szczawiński 54/1829). An auction of the movables of the late Marianna née Wodzińska Jasińska was announced in 1827 (Modrzewski 25/1827). This is most likely the same person (?): the forename and maiden name agree, as does the fact that in 1829 the testator is already praying for her soul, but there are no other anchors.

Many identifications within this family remain open. Whether the wójt is the same person as the Kazimierz Jasiński who wrote the will of Michał Biernacki of Krasusy Łęgnowola — drawn up on 30 November 1819 and entered as an act of 1820 — the abstracts do not settle; there Jasiński is not called wójt, and his relationship to the testator's daughter, Tekla Jasińska by marriage, is not stated (Szaniawski 53/1820). Felicjan Jasiński, a witness from Jasionka (Modrzewski 263/1826), and Felicjan, father of Wojciech of Plewki (Modrzewski 105/1826), are two mentions with no proof that they are one man. The same is true of Konstanty Jasiński of Szczepanki, a witness in Siedlce in 1812 (Witkowski 233/1812), and Konstanty, a witness to Wojciech's will in 1826 (Modrzewski 105/1826), and of Aloizy Jasiński, son-in-law of Franciszka née Skrzyszowska (Szaniawski 79/1825), and Urodzony Aloizy Jasieński, a witness in 1830 (Modrzewski 37/1830).

Families of the district. Of the families on the list for the Jasionka area, the most frequent are the Borkowscy — in 59 acts, in 17 of them as testators (Witkowski 74/1813). Next come the Domańscy and the Izdebscy, each in 47 acts (Szaniawski 422/1811; Roguski 466/1835), the Krasuscy in 44 (Szaniawski 707/1817), the Karwowscy in 42 (Szaniawski 553/1812), the Celińscy and the Jastrzębscy, each in 39 (Szaniawski 310/1821; Modrzewski 35/1830), the Wysokińscy in 37 (Szaniawski 141/1824), and the Goławscy, in the acts usually Gołascy, and the Radzikowscy, each in 32 (Szaniawski 494/1815; Olędzki 141/1819). The Pogonowscy appear in 6 acts, mostly through women: a testatrix from Pogonów, widow of Wojciech Borkowski and of Walenty Zabłocki (Witkowski 315/1811), Rozalia Chromińska as guardian of children (Olędzki 90/1819), Małgorzata Grochowska as widow and heir to land (Szaniawski 170/1833), and Katarzyna Pogonowska, daughter of Wojciech Ługowski known as Paziorek (Modrzewski 119/1835). These figures cover every role — testator, heir, witness, debtor — and rest on the pattern of the surname, so they also count persons who are not related; the Szaniawscy, for instance, include an act in which the executor is the notary of that name (Szaniawski 396/1813).

People and milieu. What these acts show is above all a portrait of the petty gentry around Łuków and Siedlce: part-owners, often illiterate, disposing of a few hundred złoty, some livestock and a few strips of land, and bound to their neighbours by loans secured on land (Szaniawski 138/1831; Szaniawski 521/1832). The Siedlce acts add the town and the administration — officials, officers, newcomers from afar, institutional charity (Witkowski 319/1811; Chojnacki 184/1826) — although part of the difference between the two towns comes from the chanceries' formularies. In both milieux the will is more a family matter than a matter of the soul — only one act in four contains a pious legacy. In it women dispose of their own dowries and reward those who nursed them, parents exchange the farm for usufruct for life and a proper burial, and the religious framing of the act weakens over time, at a pace that cannot be separated from the change of notary (Szaniawski 46/1824; Modrzewski 37/1830; Roguski 59/1836).

Doubts. Almost every change over time — in titles, formulas, pious legacies, executors — coincides with a change of notary, and some samples are very small: Lipnicki has 12 (2 %) acts, and Olędzki only 6 dispositive acts in 1820–1829 (Lipnicki 205/1811; Olędzki 242/1820). Percentages for such groups are only indicative, and for Siedlce in 1820–1829 they may shift markedly once the outstanding acts have been read (Chojnacki 83/1822). Some surnames, sums and place names carry markers of uncertain reading in the abstracts; such data should not be transferred to family trees without checking the act (Szaniawski 603/1818; Chojnacki 298/1823). Contradictions within acts also need to be checked against the manuscript. Maciej Jastrzębski of Jasionka declares „Żadnego potomstwa niezostawiam” [I leave no offspring], yet under the usufruct the abstract records a mention of a daughter, Franciszka (Modrzewski 56/1826); a contract of 1815 cites a will dated 1817 (Szaniawski 328/1815). The identifications given above with a question mark — Kazimierz Jasiński the wójt and the writer of Biernacki's will, Marianna née Wodzińska Jasińska, the testators in the revocations before Chojnacki and Olędzki — need to be confirmed from the full text of the acts (Szaniawski 53/1820; Modrzewski 25/1827; Olędzki 682/1818).

Notarial deeds — Łuków and Siedlce (edition, search of deeds and persons)