Ron Mlejnek wrote: > Jim suggests this question is too "restrictive". As I stated in my post "If you haven't received any answers, perhaps your subject is too restrictive". Apparently I should've said that the "subject line is too restrictive". It all depends on how many folks are researching land records in Moravia .... Because of the subject line, I almost deleted the posting without reading it. To respond to some of the other notes posted on this very subject, I can only relate to the research that was done by Jaroslav Fiala on my behalf. From the Prague Archives, I had previously had my family line determined back to about 1670 based on church records held at the archives. My tasking to Jaroslav was to go back as far as was reasonable (time-wise, cost-wise, etc). His approach was to research tax and land records starting in Praskolesy in the early 1700s. The research ended in the early 1600s in Tetin Bohemia because the earlier records of interest for that region would after many hours of research at most only yield a birth date of the son of my earliest ancestor. The books (records, microfilms) that were referenced in the five pages of record extracts and commentary were: Kapitula Karlstejn book 32, Grundbuch "Kniha gruntovniho rizeni aneb soudu purkrechtnich 1717-1799" Kapitula Karlstejn book 34, list of land 1710-1719 "Herrschaftliche und unter-thaenige Felder-Specifikacion bei dem Gut Praskoles" Kapitula Karlstejn book 41-2, "Registra rizeni stavunku 1675, 1698-1720" Kapitula Karlstejn book 32, Grundbuch 1665-1715 "Popis poddanych praskoleskych, toboleckych, menanskych gruntu, luk, poli a sacunku" Kapitula Karlstejn book 33, Grundbuch "Vytah ze starych register purkrechtnich" 1622 Church register Bezdedice, book 26 - index of births 1664-1733 Berni Rula Podbrdsko (Land register 1654) Church register of Karlstejn (1601-1651) Land registers of Tetin Vs Karlstejn book 255 1674 - Vs Karlstejn book 254 1647 -1674 Vs Karlstejn book 253 1608- Not all sources gave positive results and in at least one instance, only an index was available as the original book no longer existed. Other books were attempted, but found illegible. I don't know if the research was done on microfilm or the original document - quite possibly a combination of both. To attempt an answer to some of Ron's other questions, bear in mind that I am not an expert on land records and I am only developing my comments from Jaroslav's report. > 1) Are there such things as land records or is this a hoax? I think that has been answered above. > 2) How extensive are these records? In other words, do they only > include estates and estate owners or do they also include all > inhabitants of estates such as peasants? I believe that will depend on the region. The land records that have been extracted on my behalf are concerning land (farms) as it passes from person to person, e.g. after death of the husband, where it passes to the widow or children. How inclusive? don't forget that we're talking about records over four hundred years old that have gone through wars, etc. written under whatever rules existed for record keeping for the region at that time. > 3) It is indicated that they exist back to 1612. How far back do > such records go? Depends on the region and the conditions that underwhich the records were kept. In the region that I'm working with, I understand that few useable records exist earlier were researched. The remainder of the questions are on storage and access ... if memory serves, most records are in the state and regional archive system and that is where the research would have to be done .. on-site. The specific requirements for appointment time, permissions, etc would have top be obtained from the specific archive. For Millie's question: > Where did Jaroslav Fiala go to research these land records? How much > info was on the records? Can I assume that "land records" include > houses in the villages or is it farm land? Were occupations listed? Jaroslav's research was done at the Prague Archives. Roughly the information found were as mentioned above, purchasers, inherentences. Your assumption of the "land records" sounds reasonable although mine were only referrring to farm lands. For occupations, I think you would have to look at other documents than land records ... censuses, etc. Now that I have bored most reading this post, I better quit ... <grin> Regards. Jim Sladek