Hi Paul, Did you collate all your findings into a database......? Have you checked non-conformist Parish registers as well........My Hilliers actually bounced between the two C of E and non conformist in the 1700's.......so don't discount them like I did for years. Is it possible that the second Mary was the wife of a son Christopher (of Christopher) It's hard I know, but because you have four missing children and missing deaths, have you tried Chessington PR's? Perhaps they returned to her home town for a spell......or moved with work....... The trouble when you get this far back is no census data, so really you are resorting to the IGI, The National death index, pallots marriage index and other such data.......even online trees, with the hope of confirming it yourself later. I tend to get very pedantic and search Parish registers within a 10 mile radius of the home Parish.......ie Epsom. You might narrow things down by asking if anyone on the list has particular parishes, thus elimiating them..... AND also googling for PR's online, perhaps eliminating others from your search quadrant. Hey cherub, if it was easy everyone would do it. Chuckle. Happy hunting. Pam I am forever trying to solve the Eggleton mystery in the mid 1700's in Epsom. I have searched all (I think all) of the Epsom church records. My 4x gt gf was Christopher EGGLETON (Egleton/Eagleton and even Aggleton are variations). There are many baptisms at the parish church Epsom with Christopher as the father starting with dau Sarah in 1754 wife Mary as the mother. They continue with Sarah as the mother - starting with Mary 1757 and ending with Robert 1782 and then the last one is another with Mary as the mother - James 1786. I have found the marriage of Christopher to a Mary Reynolds in neighboring Chessington in 1763. The 1754 entry is the earliest Epsom record of an Eggleton and I thought there was Christopher the elder, whose wife was Mary and they moved into Epsom and 1754 was the final child and the younger Christopher m. a Sarah and then had all the other children but what about the final one with mother Mary? OR - they got the names of the mothers wrong - there are 11 with mother Sarah - they can't have got it wrong 11 times. So who was Mary? Also I can trace every child except 4 in the middle Elizabeth 1764, John 1765, Thomas 1767 and Hannah 1770 they have just disappeared. I found the burial of a Christopher in Epsom in 1788 but nothing at all regarding the wives Sarah and/or Mary. Help would be gratefully received. Paul

I would love to look at the Chessington parish records but I am now in the U.S. and the records are on neither ancestry nor LDS and I haven't been to the local LDS library to get a copy for some time. A second cousin of mine on the other side of the family kindly looked for the marriage of Christopher in 1763 and gave me the details (no extra info really) but she said the records were the most difficult to read that she had known, so I am wondering if they are in a reasonable state to get any information from them. The other possibility is of course that he came from Thames Ditton and the records about this time and 50 odd years beforehand were completely destroyed. Thanks for your tips. I had tried most of the parishes within 10 miles but probably not all - I should list them and then tick them off one by one. I have searched the Epsom non-conf. but probably not the others. Paul ________________________________ From: pam hillier <[email protected]> To: Paul Eggleton <[email protected]>; [email protected] Sent: Monday, June 27, 2011 11:44 PM Subject: Re: [SRY] Epsom EGGLETON Hi Paul, Did you collate all your findings into a database......? Have you checked non-conformist Parish registers as well........My Hilliers actually bounced between the two C of E and non conformist in the 1700's.......so don't discount them like I did for years. Is it possible that the second Mary was the wife of a son Christopher (of Christopher) It's hard I know, but because you have four missing children and missing deaths, have you tried Chessington PR's? Perhaps they returned to her home town for a spell......or moved with work....... The trouble when you get this far back is no census data, so really you are resorting to the IGI, The National death index, pallots marriage index and other such data.......even online trees, with the hope of confirming it yourself later. I tend to get very pedantic and search Parish registers within a 10 mile radius of the home Parish.......ie Epsom. You might narrow things down by asking if anyone on the list has particular parishes, thus elimiating them..... AND also googling for PR's online, perhaps eliminating others from your search quadrant. Hey cherub, if it was easy everyone would do it. Chuckle. Happy hunting. Pam I am forever trying to solve the Eggleton mystery in the mid 1700's in Epsom. I have searched all (I think all) of the Epsom church records. My 4x gt gf was Christopher EGGLETON (Egleton/Eagleton and even Aggleton are variations). There are many baptisms at the parish church Epsom with Christopher as the father starting with dau Sarah in 1754 wife Mary as the mother. They continue with Sarah as the mother - starting with Mary 1757 and ending with Robert 1782 and then the last one is another with Mary as the mother - James 1786. I have found the marriage of Christopher to a Mary Reynolds in neighboring Chessington in 1763. The 1754 entry is the earliest Epsom record of an Eggleton and I thought there was Christopher the elder, whose wife was Mary and they moved into Epsom and 1754 was the final child and the younger Christopher m. a Sarah and then had all the other children but what about the final one with mother Mary? OR - they got the names of the mothers wrong - there are 11 with mother Sarah - they can't have got it wrong 11 times. So who was Mary? Also I can trace every child except 4 in the middle Elizabeth 1764, John 1765, Thomas 1767 and Hannah 1770 they have just disappeared. I found the burial of a Christopher in Epsom in 1788 but nothing at all regarding the wives Sarah and/or Mary. Help would be gratefully received. Paul