AT London aforesaid

< Previous | Next >

dermaus

New Member
Ukraine - Russian and Ukrainian
Hello everyone,

I've had some trouble understanding why notaries would say "at London" where it should normally be "in London".

IN FAITH AND TESTIMONY WHEREOF I the said notary have subscribed my name and set and affixed my seal of office at London aforesaid
1) Is it some archaic and/or elevated form of referring to places?

2) Is it used specifically to refer to London? I never came accross a notarial certificate saying "at Manchester aforesaid" of the like (still, it appears to be used in judgments when googled). In fact, right now I have before me a notarial instrument composed in the same elevated style but saying "in Newcastle-upon-Thyne"

Will appreciate any input!
 
Last edited:
  • dermaus

    New Member
    Ukraine - Russian and Ukrainian
    2013

    I personally have been seeing this kind of wording in notarial certificates issued by Seville and Co, Cheeswrights, De Pinna, Speechly Bircham and many others every single week for 3 years now.
     

    sound shift

    Senior Member
    English - England
    I see. It's legalese. No one would say or write this outside the confines of the legal profession. Possibly it's a survival of a style that was in more general use in the past; I don't know. I see no reason why a notary should not precede "aforesaid" with a town other than London.
     

    dermaus

    New Member
    Ukraine - Russian and Ukrainian
    Perhaps I should have made myself more clear - "aforesaid" is not the operative word here) What looks strange to me is "at London".
     

    sound shift

    Senior Member
    English - England
    "At London" is not unknown in older texts. It lives on in international treaties, conventions, etc: if you search on "signed at London", you'll find plenty of recent examples. Possibly, it lives on in a few other fields too.
     
    Last edited:

    dermaus

    New Member
    Ukraine - Russian and Ukrainian
    Suppose I have a notarial inscription made by a Russian notary and I need to translate it for my British partners. Would it be OK if I apply this "at" to Moscow preserving the rest of the wording? Or better not do that and leave "at" rest with London?

    Thank you.
     

    PaulQ

    Senior Member
    UK
    English - England
    The archaic language of the current formula may be adopted to any geographic location if, and only if, the place where the making, the witnessing, the signature and seal were made in that location, i.e if the document was made, witnessed, signed and sealed.

    The formula that you quote is known as an eschatocol: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eschatocol
     
    < Previous | Next >
    Top