# Annoque RR Caroli scdi &c xxj°



## Gundagai

All I have is a transcription of the original Latin "4° Maij 1669 Annoque RR Caroli scdi &c xxj°". It appears in a list of entries made in successive years.

Obviously the date is 4th May 1669.
I understand that "Annoque" means "in the year of".
"Caroli" is Charles (the second).

Regarding "xxj°", I'm guessing that "j°" is possibly a "thorn" and represents "th". An entry made 7 years earlier was transcribed "xiiij". Therefore "xxj°" means 20th. 

This seems like an interesting commentary on Oliver Cromwell's republic. Charles II ascended the throne in 1660, which was only 9 years earlier. But his father had lost his head in 1649, 20 years earlier. So this list is pretending that the republic never happened, and that Charles II had been the rightful king all along.

Questions:
1. What does *RR* stand for?
2. Is "*scdi*" a common abbreviation? For what? And what did it mean back then? (These days Latin SCDI means AIDS)

Thanks 

It has occurred to me that RR might stand for "regni Regis" or some such thing.


----------



## Gundagai

Aha! Is "scdi" an abbreviation of "secundi"?, as in Charles the Second??

If so then I've answered my own question  (had puzzled over this several times - it was no quick and easy path)


----------



## exgerman

He is counting his regnal years from the death of his father in Jan 1649, ignoring the unfortunate events of 1649-1660, so May 1669 is in the 21st year of his reign.

xxj° = vicesimo primo, in the ablative (hence the little -o at the end), agreeing with Anno. In manuscript Latin, "long i" is used at the end of numbers for the final i.

RR: he was doubly a king, of two then very different countries, England and Scotland. The Union of the two didn't happen till 1707.

The  &c indicated that his other titles (Lord of Ireland, titular King of France for example) are acknowledged but not written out.


----------



## Gundagai

Thanks for that 

So I'm translating it as "the 20th year of the reign of King Charles the Second etc."


----------



## exgerman

Gundagai said:


> So I'm translating it as "the 20th year of the reign of King Charles the Second etc."


Why? the text says "in the 21st year".


----------



## Gundagai

My bad.

A previous entry says "6° octobr 1663 Annoque RR Car scdi etc xv°", so if 1663 is the 15th year, then 1669 is the 21st, which is consistent with that 'j' being the final 'i', as you said.

All sorted


----------



## Kevin Beach

The first year of Charle II's reign began on the day his father died, i.e. 30 January 1649. Therefore the 15th year of his reign began on 30 January 1664. The regnal year beginning on 30 January 1669 would be the 21st.


----------



## Gundagai

Firstly, the original recordists said the 15th year was 1663, so it is them you have the disagreement with.

Charles' first regnal year ended 30 January 1650, therefore his 11th regnal year ended 30 January 1660, and his 15th regnal year ended on 30 January 1664.

So the original recordists were correct.


----------



## exgerman

Let's count []:





> Year​1​'began on jan 30​1649​Year​2​'began on jan 30​1650​Year​3​'began on jan 30​1651​Year​4​'began on jan 30​1652​Year​5​'began on jan 30​1653​Year​6​'began on jan 30​1654​Year​7​'began on jan 30​1655​Year​8​'began on jan 30​1656​Year​9​'began on jan 30​1657​Year​10​'began on jan 30​1658​Year​11​'began on jan 30​1659​Year​12​'began on jan 30​1660​Year​13​'began on jan 30​1661​Year​14​'began on jan 30​1662​Year​15​'began on jan 30​1663​Year​16​'began on jan 30​1664​Year​17​'began on jan 30​1665​Year​18​'began on jan 30​1666​Year​19​'began on jan 30​1667​Year​20​'began on jan 30​1668​Year​21​'began on jan 30​1669​
> 
> 
> < Edited to remove drift.  Cagey, moderator >


----------



## exgerman

I see that I made an error:  Jan 30 should be Jan 31 in the table.

You will need to remember that any Julian dates you encounter will be Old-Style, where the year number changes on Mar 25, not Jan 1. So, for dates between Jan 1 and Mar 24, the year number in the document will be one less than the number you expect.

Also, Old-Style month and day are 10 days ahead of Gregorian dates in the seventeenth century, This is important if you are comparing British documents to  contemporary Continental ones.


----------



## A User

Gundagai said:


> 1. What does *RR* stand for?


I have no attestation, but "RR" could in ancient times mean “regestorum regni”.
Just my foolish guess.


----------



## Welsh_Sion

I think @exgerman answered that in post 3, @A User. 

________________

RR: he was doubly a king, of two then very different countries, England (and Wales) and Scotland. He was the head of the two kingdoms. Political union did not take place until 1707.


----------



## A User

Welsh_Sion said:


> RR: he was doubly a king, of two then very different countries, England (and Wales) and Scotland. He was the head of the two kingdoms. Political union did not take place until 1707.


Seriously, not simply a genitive plural of “regnum”. Every king dominated over more countries.
I found this, without abbreviation: “Anno III *REGNORUM* Serenissimi *REGIS* Roberti” (Roberto d’Angiò regnava da 3 anni).


----------



## Le parent italien

A User said:


> Seriously, not simply a genitive plural of “regnum”. Every king dominated over more countries.
> I found this, without abbreviation: “Anno III *REGNORUM* Serenissimi *REGIS* Roberti” (Roberto d’Angiò regnava da 3 anni).


Check these two List of classical abbreviations - Wikipedia. Book 1: 1669 | British History Online


----------

