Hello, list -- On 12 Oct, Clive <Clive.Bates@btinternet.com> asked some interesting questions on the list. I haven't noticed any comments or answers yet so thought I would give it a try, hopefully to Clive's satisfaction. If anyone else has thoughts to add to mine, either in agreement or disagreement, please do post them. I've included my replies below, as indicated by the **, after each of Clive's questions. Here's what Clive asked -- What makes a Huguenot a Huguenot?. Is it: 1. A person whose records are found in a Huguenot, Walloon or Strangers Church. ** I would say yes to this. A person whose name is found in such records would have been attending that church because they were a member of that congregation and an adherent to the beliefs of that church. But remember, as well, that the people which we, today, call Huguenots would not have called themselves that. The Huguenot label arose later and the origins of it are not definitely known. 2. A person who has married into a Huguenot family. ** I would say no. Marrying into a Huguenot family does not in itself make that person Huguenot. 3. A person who because of persecution has emigrated from a Huguenot area irrespective of religious persuasion. ** I would say no again. A Huguenot was a Protestant (follower of John Calvin) forced to flee their homeland in Europe because of persecutions by Catholic governments of that day. 4. A person whose parents were Huguenots but whose christening or birth is not found in Huguenot or Walloon records. ** I would say that such a person is a child of (descendent of) Huguenot refugees. Lastly, Clyde also asked -- Were Huguenot immigrants to Canterbury immediately absorbed into the Church of England? ** First, keep in mind that the first refugees to arrive in Canterbury were mainly Walloons from Flanders, starting in the mid-1500's. Later, in the 1570's, French Protestants from France began arriving after the St. Bartholomiew's Day Massacre. Also keep in mind that the refugees never built a church of their own -- they were given various locations by local authorities where they could hold their services, the last one being space in the Undercroft of the Cathedral. Anyway, back to Clive's question. I think the answer to it is sometimes yes but sometimes no. In other words, there's no one answer which would fit all refugees, times periods and circumstances. Some may have begun attending one of the already-existing (C of E) parish churches soon after their arrival, although this may have been rare because of the language difference. Others may have chosen to attend only the Walloon Church for some time (or the Malt-house Chapel when it was set up in the early 1700's) before going to the parish church. Still others may have gone to parish churches for certain events, eg. burials -- because I don't think the Walloon Church had a burial ground, or at least I've not heard of one -- and to the Walloon Church for marriages or baptisms. In any case and for all the refugees, assimilation eventually took place. This most likely varied from family to family and perhaps from parish to parish. For a detailed post about the Walloon Church at Canterbury, please see the May 1 post in list archives with subject line: Canterbury, Kent, ENG: Walloon Church & community. Hope this has helped to clear up some of the questions above. Andrea