Definition
A Latin abbreviation meaning "that is to say" or "to wit." Used in legal pleadings, affidavits, conveyances, and other instruments to introduce a more specific or particular statement of something previously mentioned in general terms. Scilicet narrows, distributes, or clarifies what precedes it — it does not add new matter or enlarge the scope of what was already stated.
In modern practice, scilicet appears most visibly in the venue clause of affidavits and notarized documents, where it signals that the jurisdiction identified in the caption is the place where the document was executed. It is commonly abbreviated sc. or ss. — the doubled "ss." form being the one most practitioners encounter today without necessarily recognizing its origin.
Common Language
Modern common usage (Wiktionary): "Namely, to wit, as follows." Also used parenthetically to supply context omitted from a quoted passage, and in documents to indicate the place of a legally relevant act.
Historical common usage (Webster's 1913): "To wit; namely; videlicet — often abbreviated to sc., or ss."
The common and legal meanings are close but not identical. In ordinary usage, scilicet functions as a general clarifying connector, interchangeable with "namely" or "that is." In legal instruments, it carries a formal structural role: it must neither expand nor contract the meaning of what it follows. Rapalje & Lawrence make this precise — scilicet "must neither increase nor diminish" the preceding statement. That constraint is invisible in ordinary usage and matters considerably in the interpretation of historical pleadings and deeds.
Common Confusion
Scilicet is routinely confused with videlicet (abbreviated viz.), and the two serve nearly identical introductory functions. Burrill notes that videlicet "is now more common" — a statement accurate for the 19th century and even more so today. The practical difference: videlicet was traditionally preferred when introducing an enumeration or list of particulars, while scilicet was used to particularize or explain a single preceding generality. In practice, the distinction collapsed early, and courts treated the two as interchangeable for most purposes. Researchers encountering ss. in affidavit venue blocks are seeing scilicet, not videlicet, though the functional effect is the same.
The doubled abbreviation ss. is itself a source of confusion. Many practitioners assume it stands for a distinct legal phrase. It does not — it is simply a conventional doubling of the abbreviation sc., a scribal habit that hardened into standard form.
Why It Matters in Research
Researchers working with historical pleadings, deeds, affidavits, or any formal instrument from the common law tradition will encounter scilicet or its abbreviations with some frequency. Several traps are worth noting.
First, the abbreviation problem. Corpus searches for "scilicet" will miss most instances of the term, which appears far more often as sc., ss., or (in older manuscripts) a single s. A researcher examining 18th- or 19th-century affidavits who does not recognize ss. as scilicet will misread the venue block entirely.
Second, the venue function. In affidavits, the ss. appearing between the state and county identifications is not decorative. It signals that the notarization or sworn statement occurred within that jurisdiction, which can matter when assessing whether a historical affidavit was properly executed under the law of the relevant forum.
Third, the pleading function. In historical common law pleadings, scilicet introduced the specific time, place, or manner of a fact alleged generally in the declaration. Courts examined whether the scilicet clause was consistent with the general allegation it followed — and a scilicet that appeared to enlarge or contradict the general statement could create a pleading defect. This technical rule is irrelevant to modern practice but essential for researchers interpreting case law from the 18th and 19th centuries where pleading technicalities drove outcomes.
Fourth, scilicet as interpretive marker. In conveyancing, a scilicet clause was understood as explanatory, not operative. If a scilicet clause contradicted the granting clause, courts generally subordinated the scilicet. Researchers reading deed disputes or title chain cases from that era need to understand this hierarchy.
Historical Dictionary Support
The historical dictionaries agree on the core meaning without meaningful divergence. Black's (both editions) and Burrill track nearly identically, citing Hobart 171-172 for the pleading usage. Rapalje & Lawrence provide the most analytically precise treatment, articulating the rule that scilicet is an intermediate, not a substantive, clause — it particularizes what is general, distributes what is collective, or explains what is doubtful, but may not independently alter meaning.
Burrill adds a useful note on etymology (from scire, to know, and licet, it is permitted — "it is permitted to know"), but also observes that by the 19th century videlicet had become the more common term. This signals that corpus researchers working with later 19th-century materials will find scilicet increasingly displaced by viz. and its variants, while ss. persisted in the affidavit venue formula as a frozen convention.
Anderson's Dictionary of Law cross-references to SCIRE without independent treatment — a reminder that some historical dictionaries handled Latin terms cursorily, and the researcher should move to Burrill or Rapalje & Lawrence for substantive analysis.
Jurisdictional Note
The affidavit venue formula using ss. is substantially uniform across American jurisdictions as a matter of convention, though its strict legal necessity has eroded. Some states have abandoned formal venue block requirements for notarized documents; others retain them. Researchers evaluating whether a historical affidavit was procedurally valid must check the rules of the specific jurisdiction and period, not assume that the presence or absence of ss. resolved the question uniformly.