Maybe the more correct of the two between Parish Registers and Bishops transcript, would be the Parish Registers. Did you check the Banns as well should correspond with the Parish register, or License whichever way it went. I understand the Bishops transcripts could have been copied anytime up to a month after the event. Edie ----- Original Message ----- From: "klausdach" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2012 8:50 PM Subject: Re: [B&S] Lesson learnt > You are all confirming what I know and have proved. There are at least 7 > Family Lists on Ancestry pertaining to my family and all have it > incorrect. > There is a mistranscription between the Parish Records and the Bishops > Transcripts giving a different Bride, same date. Phillimores Marriage > Records for the Parish Church and another for the Local Church also differ > but then the entry on the Phillimores Directories on line notes the > incorrect entry giving both Brides. I have obtained all the original > entries, Banns, Marriage, Baptism of their children entries so believe I > have the correct information so I can only presume they have either all > followed one another or not confirmed their information. Patricia G. > in Melbourne. > > >> Dear List, >> Last year we joined ancestry and duly added all my information on my >> family from Midsomer Norton.Now I am usually really pedantic about my >> research and check and double check and follow up with certificates where >> I can.I didn't have much on my GGrandfathers brother Richard but a hint >> got me in contact with a lady who was related to him which made me very >> excited.For 2 years we have been corresponding and I didn't recheck what >> was given to me .Now my new cousin has informed me that at last she has >> sent for her GGGrandfathers marriage certificate and instead of Richard >> being his father she has discovered it was a James,therefore throwing all >> the information I have out the window.Maybe somewhere down the track we >> may find a connection and have decided to stay in contact as "adopted >> cousins" but this has taught me a big lesson,ie even when all appears >> right please don't take it as gospel.You still need to check it all >> yourself and follow up with certificates etc where you can.. >> I started this email to ask for a lookup but will do so in another email. >> Regards Elaine Skehan, >> Victoria,Australia. >> >> >> >> ======= >> Email scanned by PC Tools - No viruses or spyware found. >> (Email Guard: 9.0.0.888, Virus/Spyware Database: 6.20620) >> http://www.pctools.com/ >> ======= >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' >> without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' > without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

From: "Edie" <[email protected]> > Maybe the more correct of the two between Parish Registers and Bishops > transcript, would be the Parish Registers. Did you check the Banns > as well should correspond with the Parish register, or License whichever way > it went. I understand the Bishops transcripts could have been copied > anytime up to a month after the event. < > Edie Sometimes a year after the event! Particularly when some clerics were bone idle and didn't get round to doing the BTs until they suddenly realised the Bishop or the Archdeacon would be chasing them up and panicked. Or if they were really lazy they'd get the curate or parish clerk to do it, which is why it is always worth checking both the registers and the BTs if you possibly can because sometimes they don't agree with one another. I have a classic example in my Yorkshire researches in Scarborough where the IGI, which had been extracted from the BTs, showed my great-great-grandfather as being 18 at marriage and his wife 20. In fact, when I went to check the registers it transpired that the nought in 20 was actually a 6, so my great-great-grandmother was actually 26 and some 8 years older than her "toy boy" husband and not two years older. A good friend of mine, Colin Blanshard Withers, another well-known Yorkshire genealogist, cites a case where the incumbent used to scribble out the details of baptisms, marriages and burials on the backs of old envelopes, sugar bags and the like and then once a year he'd write them out properly and send them to the Bishop, presumably storing the envelopes and sugar bags in a drawer as the original registers! -- Roy Stockdill Genealogical researcher, writer & lecturer Famous family trees blog: http://blog.findmypast.co.uk/tag/roy-stockdill/ "There is only one thing in the world worse than being talked about, and that is not being talked about." OSCAR WILDE