ABERDEEN-L Archives

Archiver > ABERDEEN > 2003-10 > 1065347069


From: Gavin Bell <>
Subject: Re:[ABERDEEN]"Register of Scotland Sasines"
Date: Sun, 05 Oct 2003 10:44:29 +0100


Heidi wrote:

> Would such a "register" tell me about a transfer of the property of a
> hardware shop from one person to another? In Huntly, that is.

It might. But beware: entries in Registers of Sasines are concerned
principally with transfers of land, and often do not mention the
buildings, or what purpose they were put to. The title deeds for my
house, for example, while they delineate the building plot, and give the
history of its ownership, and specify that I must not indulge in
antisocial trades such as brewing and soap-boiling, do not actually
mention a house! Legally speaking, the fact that there is one is just a
happy accident.

And while the proprietor of a shop may well have sold his business
(stock and goodwill) to someone else, it is quite possible that he did
not actually own the shop premises, but rented them. If that was the
case, then such a transfer will not appear in the Registers of Sasines.

> There is a microfilm titled such and compiled by Melvin Olsen. Dates
> are from 1599-1868, and is described as a transcript.

Beware also, that until 1868, there was not a single "Register of
Sasines". There was a "General Register", into which transactions from
anywhere in Scotland MIGHT be entered, but there were also "Particular
Registers", for different counties, and separate Burgh Registers. I
don't think Huntly ever had its own Burgh Register, but transactions
there might be in either the "General Register" or the "Particular
Register" for Aberdeenshire.

The other thing to be said is that the Registers of Sasines are quite
wordy documents, running to many thousands of volumes. I have been
working on indexing just one volume (covering a period of just 3 years)
of the Aberdeen Burgh Register of Sasines, and that is a large volume
(about 14"x9") which runs to about 550 pages. So whatever M Olsen has
put on his microfilm, it can only be a tiny fraction of the whole.


Gavin Bell


This thread: