Discussion:
RA minor correction Frances Deighton
Add Reply
Nathan Murphy
2020-06-16 10:11:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
In 2:412, the baptism date of Frances's husband Richard Williams is given as 28 Jan 1607/8 at Wotton under Edge, Gloucestershire (citing TAG article). An image of the original parish register entry is now available online Ancestry. I would suggest a reading of 18 Jan 1606[/7] for your inspection: https://www.ancestry.com/interactive/4732/41511_1831109387_4360-00033/1753104

I can see how the American's lookup person in England misread 18 as 28.

Nathan
Nathan Murphy
2020-06-16 10:19:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Nathan Murphy
In 2:412, the baptism date of Frances's husband Richard Williams is given as 28 Jan 1607/8 at Wotton under Edge, Gloucestershire (citing TAG article). An image of the original parish register entry is now available online Ancestry. I would suggest a reading of 18 Jan 1606[/7] for your inspection: https://www.ancestry.com/interactive/4732/41511_1831109387_4360-00033/1753104
I can see how the American's lookup person in England misread 18 as 28.
Nathan
The misreading may actually be an American's fault. The author of the article mentions a trip to Gloucestershire. (TAG 9:136)
Jan Wolfe
2020-06-17 16:02:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Nathan Murphy
Post by Nathan Murphy
In 2:412, the baptism date of Frances's husband Richard Williams is given as 28 Jan 1607/8 at Wotton under Edge, Gloucestershire (citing TAG article). An image of the original parish register entry is now available online Ancestry. I would suggest a reading of 18 Jan 1606[/7] for your inspection: https://www.ancestry.com/interactive/4732/41511_1831109387_4360-00033/1753104
I can see how the American's lookup person in England misread 18 as 28.
Nathan
The misreading may actually be an American's fault. The author of the article mentions a trip to Gloucestershire. (TAG 9:136)
The article states that the parish record information was extracted by the rector of the church. Perhaps the rector or the author converted the Jan-Mar entries to the modern statement of the year, as none of the Jan-March entries are listed with double years, and the the few I checked are all converted to the modern year reckoning.

In the case of Richard's baptism, perhaps the rector or the author also added 10 days, although in the few other dates I checked, 10 days were not added. It is difficult to see how the date could have been misread as the subsequent two entries are both dated January 25. Isn't it splendid that the images of the register are now available!

The baptisms listed for 1600 in the article are in the list headed 1599 in the register. The 1599 records start with January and go through December. There is a gap in the register from 1586-1598 and then a gap from 1600-1601. The 1602 records start in July of that year.
c***@gmail.com
2020-06-29 22:49:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Nathan Murphy
In 2:412, the baptism date of Frances's husband Richard Williams is given as 28 Jan 1607/8 at Wotton under Edge, Gloucestershire (citing TAG article). An image of the original parish register entry is now available online Ancestry. I would suggest a reading of 18 Jan 1606[/7] for your inspection: https://www.ancestry.com/interactive/4732/41511_1831109387_4360-00033/1753104
I can see how the American's lookup person in England misread 18 as 28.
Nathan
Nathan ~

Thank you for posting this correction. Much appreciated. It would appear that the Family History Library only has the Bishop's Transcripts for Wotton-under-Edge, Gloucestershire. I assume that Ancestry has the actual parish registers. Right?

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Nathan Murphy
2020-06-30 00:20:27 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by c***@gmail.com
Thank you for posting this correction. Much appreciated. It would appear that the Family History Library only has the Bishop's Transcripts for Wotton-under-Edge, Gloucestershire. I assume that Ancestry has the actual parish registers. Right?
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Yes that's correct. Ancestry went to the archive and photographed the original parish registers in color. So, they didn't use the Family History Library microfilms of bishop's transcripts.

Cheers, Nathan

Loading...