Hi Nivard Thank you once again for the information you sent me. It is much appreciated. Jan ----- Original Message ----- From: <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2007 8:04 AM Subject: ENG-DURHAM Digest, Vol 2, Issue 161 > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: Help wanted ([email protected]) > 2. Re: Help wanted (Nivard Ovington) > 3. thank you (Janet Hasler) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 04:15:57 EDT > From: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [ENG-DURHAM] Help wanted > To: [email protected] > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" > > > In a message dated 14/08/2007 22:00:31 GMT Daylight Time, > [email protected] > writes: > > Hi Geoff > > I was just about to post on this but note your mention of the PRs > starting > in 1609 > >>From Genuki on Stanhope is :- > > Church Records > "The register dates from 1595." [From History, Topography and Directory > of > Durham, Whellan, London, 1894] > > The Parish Registers for the period 1609-1974 are deposited at Durham > County > Record Office, County Hall, Durham, DH1 5UL (EP/St). > > And from Phillimores :- Under copies of regs not at Soc Gen 1595 - 1812 > (which somewhat contradicts the item under Copies of Registers at the Soc > Gen 1607 - 1837) > > > > > Nivard: > > My information was taken from the 2nd edition of the National > Index > of Parish Registers, Vol XI Pt 1 (1984), Durham and Northumberland, > published > by the Society of Genealogists (ISBN 0 901878 66 9). The first edition > (1979) had been compiled by Charles Neat but he died before the second > edition > was called for, so that was compiled by the late Don Mason - with a > little help > from yours truly. Under Stanhope it indicates that the original records > from 1609 are in Durham County Record Office. To summarise the other > details, > the marriages 1613-1812 were published by the Durham and Northumberland > Parish > Register Society. Indexes (ie indexed transcripts) are in Newcastle > Central > Library (the H M Wood transcripts) and microfilm copies of those are in > Salt > Lake City. The marriages are in Boyd's Marriage Index and the Banns are > in > Boyd's "Miscellaneous" Volume. Baptisms from 1609 are on the IGI. Some > extracts are in Gateshead Public Library. The BTs run from 1762-1833, > with > gaps. Notes to the Stanhope entry refer to "Weardle St John" (ie St > John's > Chapel), some of the entries from which are included as separate lists in > some of > the Stanhope volumes, and to Heathery Cleugh which, like St John's > Chapel, > became a parish of its own, formed out of Stanhope parish. A more > telling note > is probably "Many gaps in CMB"! > > That is a summary! The full entry, which contains too many > abbreviations for it to be given here verbatim, also includes the outside > dates in each > case - but the earliest date mentioned is 1609. > > As perhaps you know if you have looked at the earliest entries in many > registers, it is sometimes obvious that a register began to be kept on a > regular basis in, say, 1609, but a few earlier entries may have been > added > retrospectively, perhaps on the fly-leaf, at a later date. In such cases > the "few" > might be several dozen or it may be only one. If Stanhope registers > include > one such entry, dating from 1595, and then no more until 1609, it would > hardly be fair to say they began in 1595 when, as a regularly kept, > continuous and > chronological register, it began in 1609. That is only an example of the > sort of thing that might have happened - I am not saying that was the > case in > Stanhope, though I suspect it might have been something very similar. > > Geoff Nicholson > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 11:33:45 +0100 > From: "Nivard Ovington" <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [ENG-DURHAM] Help wanted > To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]> > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; > reply-type=original > > Many thanks Geoff > > Appreciate your time > > You have confirmed what I thought to be the case but wanted to be sure > > Best wishes Nivard Ovington, in Cornwall (UK) > > > >> Nivard: >> >> My information was taken from the 2nd edition of the National >> Index >> of Parish Registers, Vol XI Pt 1 (1984), Durham and Northumberland, >> published >> by the Society of Genealogists (ISBN 0 901878 66 9). The first edition >> (1979) had been compiled by Charles Neat but he died before the second >> edition >> was called for, so that was compiled by the late Don Mason - with a >> little help >> from yours truly. Under Stanhope it indicates that the original records > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 17:29:11 +0100 > From: "Janet Hasler" <[email protected]> > Subject: [ENG-DURHAM] thank you > To: <[email protected]> > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > Hi Geoff > Thank you for your reply and the information you sent me. > The information came from Genes reunited site where other people are also > doing family trees on the Westgarth family. > Also from the IGI site.I live in Dorset so I am a long way from the Durham > record office but I will still keep searching. > Thank you once again. > Jan. > > ------------------------------ > > To contact the ENG-DURHAM list administrator, send an email to > [email protected] > > To post a message to the ENG-DURHAM mailing list, send an email to > [email protected] > > __________________________________________________________ > 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 > email with no additional text. > > > End of ENG-DURHAM Digest, Vol 2, Issue 161 > ****************************************** >