Source catalogue

The sender informs Robert Forbes about a transaction and goods, then lists several costs or charges. Several types of goods and figures are visible, but not all names, units, or totals can be read reliably. Page 41 is the address side.

The upper part of p. 55 contains a separate copy of a short Polish document dated 2 May. It concerns a commercial matter or account, but most of the text and proper names are illegible. The lower text on the same page is a second copy and is not combined here.

The sender reports on a consignment and its transport, discusses how the goods should be handled, and refers to related charges. Packages and values are mentioned, but the goods, intermediaries, and account cannot be reconstructed with confidence. Page 49 is the address-bearing reverse.

The sender replies to Robert Forbes’s correspondence and discusses goods and their accounting. The text refers to consignments, values, and transport, but not all details can be read. Page 45 is the folded address-bearing reverse of the letter.

The statement dated 2 August 1687 names Thomas Kielika and lists numbered bales and packages, with weights or values. Later entries concern weighing and transport charges. Several package marks and some figures are legible, but the goods and full calculations remain uncertain.

The lower part of p. 55 contains a second, independent copy of a Polish document. A legible passage refers to correspondence and an account associated with the names Daniel Davison and Robert Brown, but the relationships and details remain uncertain. This copy has not been joined to the text above.

The letter discusses goods carried in packages, their quantities, and related accounts. The sender refers to the condition or quality of the goods and to transport. Many details and figures are difficult to read, so no specific values have been assigned. Page 47 contains the address-bearing reverse.

The letter to Robert Forbes discusses the transport and accounting of goods. The sender refers to shipped items, their cost or value, and further commercial arrangements. Goods names and the account are partly illegible. Page 57 is the outer address-bearing reverse with a seal.

The letter discusses a shipment of packages containing goods, its transport, and accounting. The sender refers to a lot of seven packages and a person described as an administrator or official; the exact role and name are uncertain. Some entries and figures are visible but cannot be reliably assigned. Page 39 is the address side.

The sheet dated 1 August 1687 lists numbered bales and other items with associated values. The rest concerns accounting related to weighing and transport; many goods and calculations are uncertain. Page 27 is a folded leaf addressed to Lviv.

The sender reports preparing a shipment of two bales, gives their mark, and mentions some costs and values. The numbers and destination are not fully certain; the letter concerns arranging the shipment and its accounting.

The specification lists numbered batches of goods, including bales and other articles, with quantities, measures or weights, and calculated values. The second page continues the accounts and gives a total; most names and accounting details need further checking. The document was probably signed by Ferdinand Engelhardt.

A separate account groups goods under lettered headings and gives quantities and values. Repeated piece counts, possible references to textiles or other goods, and sums in the right-hand column are visible; most names and calculations are too uncertain to reconstruct reliably. This is not a letter.

The sheet dated 21 August 1687 describes a shipment associated with Thomas Kielika. It lists letter-marked bales and another package, weights or values, and further transport accounting. Figures including 4282, 400, 3482, 1200, and 2784 are visible, but their full meaning and units need verification. Page 33 is the address side.

This second letter of 8 May, separate from the one on p. 48, discusses commercial correspondence, transport, and the assessment of goods. The sender refers to shipped items and further arrangements; some details are illegible. Page 51 is a folded address-bearing reverse.

The letter concerns a current commercial transaction and accounts relating to goods. The surviving text refers to correspondence, a shipment, and amounts, but the handwriting makes it impossible to identify most goods or reconstruct the account with confidence.

A separate account lists batches of various textiles and other goods with quantities and prices. Several kinds of material and calculations in the right-hand column are visible, but most names and totals cannot be read with confidence. This is not a letter.

The sender returns to a delivery and its accounting, mentioning two bales and a textile called “Battung.” Several amounts, including 1080 and 110, are visible, but their relation to the listed items needs further reading.

The sender informs Robert Forbes about shipments and their accounting. The letter mentions transport to Os… (place name uncertain), several packages, and lots associated with Thomas Kielika/Kielike (uncertain reading). It also discusses weight, quality or condition, and arrangements for delivery and costs. Many accounting details cannot be safely reconstructed.

The loose sheet tabulates quantities of goods, calculations, and values. Numbers including 110, 9, 128, and 2216 are visible; goods names, units, and whether the total is a monetary value cannot be confidently established. This is not a letter.

The specification describes goods brought or sent in numbered batches. It lists bales, textiles, and other items with quantities and prices; the second page adds entries and a summary. Specific names and figures are partly illegible.

The letter to Robert Forbes dated 13 March 1692 discusses a shipment of goods and its packaging. The sender refers to the quality or condition of the goods and the calculation of their value and transport costs. Different materials or goods are mentioned, but names and accounts are only partly legible. Page 43 is the address side.

The letter names Robert and Arthur Forbes and combines commercial correspondence with a list of quantities and amounts. References to bales, numbered entries, and several figures are visible; some goods and the links between amounts remain uncertain. Page 25 is a folded leaf with an address.

The sender addresses the Lviv magistrate with a petition. Readable fragments mention the chapter, Imć Bogacki, and the possibility that someone might occupy his place. The sentence is uncertain, so the particular position or matter cannot be established. The letter is dated 4 March 1756.

The writer asks the benefactor to resolve a matter effectively. A legible passage mentions a “rector” and an obligation or matter to be completed; the text does not identify the rector or the procedure. The date reads Lublin, 26 October 1701.

A separate letter to a “Most Illustrious ... Benefactor.” It mentions an “obligacyja” (obligation/duty) and “expostulacyja” (a remonstrance or statement of grievance), and asks for a matter to be settled; the subject is illegible. The lower note reads Lublin, 18 October 1701.

The document opens with the Latin formula “Nobilis ac Spectabilis Domini Domini Fratres Observandissimi.” This does not establish whether the recipients were religious brethren or another group. The Polish text concerns matters addressed to a collective recipient, but its subject is only partly legible. The date is 12 August 1725 in Zamość.

The document opens with an address to the Most Illustrious Benefactor. Legible fragments refer to the recipient and a matter or duty, but the details cannot be recovered safely. No reliable date is legible.

PDF p. 4 begins a separate letter with a new salutation, “Most Illustrious ... Benefactor.” The writer refers to a matter and renews a request for it to be settled; its subject cannot be established from the surviving reading. No date is confirmed on the page. Page 5 carries an address, not further letter text.

The writer asks the “Most Illustrious Lord and Benefactor” for assistance in a matter, but the substance cannot be read continuously. The date on p. 3 reads “Złoczowa 8 Martij 1688” (8 March 1688). The signature is illegible.

The writer congratulates the recipient on the king’s choice concerning the Ruthenian palatinate. He asks for support if a canonry becomes vacant in Lviv. The letter does not show that he received the benefice.

The writer recalls a declaration by the Lviv magistrate concerning the parish benefice and the anticipated opportunity to take it up after the death of Father Łozowski. The death of the dean also requires renewed consideration of the deanery and of the earlier declaration; the writer mentions a suffragan who was expected to take the deanery. The closing is addressed to the noble and distinguished gentlemen, and the signature appears to read “M. Rzewuski”. Dated Warsaw, 13 February 1763.

Rzewuski writes to the Lviv authorities about a case and mentions proceedings before the Tribunal in Lublin. He asks them to consider his case and support him; further details are illegible. Dated at Podhorce, 26 June 1763.

The sender thanks the recipient for ordering the apprehension of a “delinquent” by bailiff Chełmicki and mentions that he was sent to Lviv for further disposition by the Crown Treasurer. The further request and details are partly illegible. Dated at Podhorce, 21 March 1756.

Rzewuski presents a request from Warsaw merchants Feliks Salvator and Piotr (surname/designation uncertain), who asked him to recommend them to the Lviv authorities for permission to hold redoutes in Lviv. He says they bring no salt, spirits, sugar, or spices, but will buy these goods in Lviv; the further argument and details are partly illegible. Dated at Podhorce, 20 April 1762.

Rzewuski responds to the Lviv authorities’ goodwill or message, offering thanks and good wishes. He assures them of his lasting devotion and favor. Dated at Podhorce, 16 January 1767; p. 12 contains the address to the Lviv authorities.

The sender thanks the consuls for their goodwill toward him and his household, mentions a recommendation and a matter connected with the local archcathedral, and asks for continued goodwill. The exact subject is partly illegible. Dated at Podhorce, 24 April 1762.

The sender asks the president of Lviv to intervene and help in a matter concerning a particular “plot” or place. He mentions a commandant and a matter involving the Carmelite fathers; the precise dispute and some proper names remain uncertain. The final date on p. 3 is read as 10 August 1753; the place is not supplied because it could not be read securely.

The sender recalls earlier signs of goodwill from the magistrate and mentions the matter of the Lviv benefice, which is to be heard in court. He asks for continued favor and promises gratitude. The date appears to be 12 May 1764; the place is probably Lubień.

The sender recalls an earlier promise by the magistrate concerning the transfer of a village whose name is uncertain. He asks the recipients to help him obtain it and assures them that he will observe the terms of the contract. Dated at Zamość, 15 February 1754.

The sender refers to earlier correspondence and asks for favorable support in a matter concerning the Lviv benefice. He mentions people connected with the matter, but names and part of the argument are illegible. Dated at Zamość, 13 February 1762.

The sender thanks the recipients for earlier favorable actions and refers to the Lviv benefice. He writes that the matter concerning the benefice is currently being heard in court and awaits a decision. Dated at Lubień, 12 May 1764.

The sender emphasizes his longstanding goodwill and readiness to serve the recipients, and wishes them health and prosperity. The precise reason for the letter was not read. Dated at Zamość, 3 January 1763.

A short letter responds to goodwill shown by the recipients and expresses hope for their continued favor. The text is brief, and the specific matter prompting the thanks has not been securely read. Dated at Zamość, 30 March 1761.

The sender recalls approaching the magistrate the previous year about a contract. He mentions a regiment stationed in Wrocław and an estate or place read uncertainly as “Dzierżanowy,” near Lviv. He asks the magistrate for favor and help in bringing the matter to completion. Dated at Zamość, 9 April 1754.

The sender recalls that on the first occasion he did not fail to provide assistance; Warsaw and the regiments are mentioned later in the text. The surviving passages do not establish the precise matter or request. The text bears internal page numbers 3 and 4. The dateline reads “W Nowosiółkach d. 20 9bris 1698”, that is, 20 November 1698.

The hetman addresses a high-ranking recipient about a matter in which the word “sejmiks” and a duty or obligation are legible. The event, people, and requested decision cannot be reliably read, so the substance is described cautiously. The letter is dated at Nowosiółki on 9 July 1696.

The sender addresses the General-in-Chief and refers to a Crown banner that should not be stationed in the recipient’s estate. Further arguments about this situation and the actions mentioned are difficult to read. No reliable date or place is visible on pages 8–10.

At the request of the Bishop of Bila Tserkva, the writer asks the Lviv magistrate to support a prelate as candidate for the parish benefice left vacant by the death of the suffragan priest. The candidate is described as an archcathedral canon with suitable birth, education, and qualities, though parts of this description are illegible. The letter repeats the request and closes with a respectful formula.

The writer addresses the recipient as “my gracious Lord and Brother”, mentions a letter from another person, and raises a matter connected with Lublin. The text says that someone “demands” something, but the surrounding passage is too illegible to identify the subject or the party making the demand. The dateline reads 9 Junii 1685 at Kamionka; the recipient’s name on the folded address is uncertain.