To add to the pasted text I sent in previous email: 1891 Census Southwick Adfield: William is a Gardener born in Sussex, Burpham Jane A. (no occupation listed) is born in Chichester Arthur C son is a Gardener born in Shoreham George P son is an Office Boy born in Shoreham Herbert Frank son is a Scholar born in Shoreham Amy dtr is a Scholar from Portslade Daisy A dtr is a Scholar from Southwick Hope this helps you, Donna The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it will change; the realist adjusts the sails. ________________________________ From: Heather Brooks via <sfhg@rootsweb.com> To: SFHG@rootsweb.com; SUSSEX-PLUS <SUSSEX-PLUS@rootsweb.com> Sent: Wednesday, November 5, 2014 9:33 AM Subject: [SFHG] Adfield Hi, would somebody be kind enough to look up William and Jane Adfield in the 1891 census most properly at Shoreham, West Sussex. And George Percy Adfield, sometimes called Percy and wife Annie in the 1901/11 census again most likely at Shoreham Many thanks Heather Brooks ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to SFHG-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

I can't help with the first part of your posting, but I might be able to help with your PS. My grandmother used to live in Camberwell and we used to be taken for walks in Ruskin Park, off Denmark Hill. On the western side of Ruskin Park there used to be a church which was known by a host of different names locally vizt. Ruskin Park, St. Saviour; Denmark Hill, St. Saviour; Champion Hill, St. Saviour and Herne Hill, St. Saviour. However, its real name according to the National Index of Parish Registers was Dulwich, St. Saviour in Denmark Park, Champion Hill. It was a parish created from East Dulwich, St. John the Evangelist in 1881 and I think that the church was demolished about 30 years ago. It has nothing to do with Southwark, St. Saviour in Borough High Street which is now the Anglican Southwark Cathedral and dedicated to St. Saviour & St. Mary Overie- and not to be confused either with Southwark, St. George the Martyr, which lies at the other end of Borough High Street. Southwark's churches can be very confusing indeed! Best wishes, Marion Woolgar Bognor Regis, West Sussex SFHG Member No: 3323

Donna When I read this, my first thought was that there were probably two different Alice T. Whilst you have done loads of research on Ts in London over at least a century, and not found another suitable candidate, they may well have existed, but either the BMD records were never created in the first place, or the written records have subsequently been lost or destroyed or just not transcribed yet. We have to rely mainly on parish records for the period in question, and many parishes have obvious "gaps" in their records, and the vicar or clerk may have omitted individual events (as shown by comparing PRs and the equivalent BTs where they exist). Unless you have other evidence that Henry and Alice Waller had strong connections with Southwark, I would assume that they lived and died close to where they lived during their marriage (Ifield??). It is all too easy having done loads of searching to assume we have all the information. But what we have is only what has survived, without being able to guess at what is missing for whatever reason (an "unknown unknown"). That is why it is important to look at other types of records if they exist (wills & admons, court cases, apprenticeships, poor law accounts etc). They cover fewer people than PRs, and their survival rate is even lower, but they can often provide some "missing" data, or corroborate (or even disprove) a theory, And unfortunately most of them are still not online, so not accessible from freezing Michigen. Ian C On Sun, 2 Nov 2014, at 15:59, Donna Casey via wrote: > I would like comments on the following: > > A woman married twice... 1597 and 1629...A burial record reading "wid" > with her first married surname. > > Here is the situation: > Alice Pardon m. John Tillinghast 1597 in Streat, Sussex. > She married Henry Waller 1629 in Ifield, Sussex, after John's death in > 1624. > > There is a burial in St. Saviour Parish, Southwark, London which appears > 28 JAN 1648 denoted "Alice Tillinghurst" with the word "wid" following > the name (which would indicate an age of about 18 and older). > > I have done a significant amount of research on this family in London > between 1550 - 1650 and there in no other Alice Tillinghast/hurst etc., > that I have uncovered which would appear as a widow at this time. There > was one infant "Alice Tillinghurst" who was buried "St.Bn" earlier....but > no other Alice T. Alice Tillinghast Waller's son, Stephen, and his > progeny lived in St. Saviour parish from 1623 until well after 1750. > > My wonder is that the family had her buried under her 1st married > name....I am even considering her body may have been taken back to Streat > to be buried with John, who died/buried Mar 1624. > > Any thoughts about this? > > I have seen numerous gravestones in which the wife who has been married > twice or more is shown on the stone as "wife of _____" giving the first > husband's name, and then buried next to the first husband....both in the > US as well as the UK. > > PS Can anyone point me to any information which tells me when St. > Saviour actually would have been "known as" or combined with Denmark Park > and then known as St Saviour Denmark Park? I believe Ancestry has their > database incorrectly denoted as "St. Saviour Denmark Park" for the very > early records of the 16th and 17th Cs and believe that is incorrect. > Need a reference to support that if anyone can help. > > Thanks very much, > Donna TILLINGHAST Casey > In a blustery grey snowy northern Michigan...well below freezing > > The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it will > change; the realist adjusts the sails. > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > SFHG-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes > in the subject and the body of the message

Thanks Marion, I have struggled with how I reference numerous ancestors' BMD's from St. Saviour parish in the 17th C. I had read some time ago that Ancestry had their reference information wrong about this parish....but now cannot find my source for that and just don't want to get that wrong. If/when I turn up the information I will post it. Thanks for your input. It does help me somewhat. Donna The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it will change; the realist adjusts the sails. ________________________________ From: Marion Woolgar <listmail008@btinternet.com> To: 'Donna Casey' <donnacasey@yahoo.com>; 'SFHG SxFamHXGrp' <sfhg-l@rootsweb.com> Sent: Sunday, November 2, 2014 1:33 PM Subject: RE: [SFHG] Surname of First Husband appears in Burial Record of Widow Married More than Once - mid 17th C? I can't help with the first part of your posting, but I might be able to help with your PS. My grandmother used to live in Camberwell and we used to be taken for walks in Ruskin Park, off Denmark Hill. On the western side of Ruskin Park there used to be a church which was known by a host of different names locally vizt. Ruskin Park, St. Saviour; Denmark Hill, St. Saviour; Champion Hill, St. Saviour and Herne Hill, St. Saviour. However, its real name according to the National Index of Parish Registers was Dulwich, St. Saviour in Denmark Park, Champion Hill. It was a parish created from East Dulwich, St. John the Evangelist in 1881 and I think that the church was demolished about 30 years ago. It has nothing to do with Southwark, St. Saviour in Borough High Street which is now the Anglican Southwark Cathedral and dedicated to St. Saviour & St. Mary Overie- and not to be confused either with Southwark, St. George the Martyr, which lies at the other end of Borough High Street. Southwark's churches can be very confusing indeed! Best wishes, Marion Woolgar Bognor Regis, West Sussex SFHG Member No: 3323

I would like comments on the following: A woman married twice... 1597 and 1629...A burial record reading "wid" with her first married surname. Here is the situation: Alice Pardon m. John Tillinghast 1597 in Streat, Sussex. She married Henry Waller 1629 in Ifield, Sussex, after John's death in 1624. There is a burial in St. Saviour Parish, Southwark, London which appears 28 JAN 1648 denoted "Alice Tillinghurst" with the word "wid" following the name (which would indicate an age of about 18 and older). I have done a significant amount of research on this family in London between 1550 - 1650 and there in no other Alice Tillinghast/hurst etc., that I have uncovered which would appear as a widow at this time. There was one infant "Alice Tillinghurst" who was buried "St.Bn" earlier....but no other Alice T. Alice Tillinghast Waller's son, Stephen, and his progeny lived in St. Saviour parish from 1623 until well after 1750. My wonder is that the family had her buried under her 1st married name....I am even considering her body may have been taken back to Streat to be buried with John, who died/buried Mar 1624. Any thoughts about this? I have seen numerous gravestones in which the wife who has been married twice or more is shown on the stone as "wife of _____" giving the first husband's name, and then buried next to the first husband....both in the US as well as the UK. PS Can anyone point me to any information which tells me when St. Saviour actually would have been "known as" or combined with Denmark Park and then known as St Saviour Denmark Park? I believe Ancestry has their database incorrectly denoted as "St. Saviour Denmark Park" for the very early records of the 16th and 17th Cs and believe that is incorrect. Need a reference to support that if anyone can help. Thanks very much, Donna TILLINGHAST Casey In a blustery grey snowy northern Michigan...well below freezing The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it will change; the realist adjusts the sails.

A postscript to my message below. I did find that the correct William Ayling was born in 1654 in Woolbeding. I figured it out partially by the proximity of headstones to his son, Thomas, which gave me his mother, then to William (via comparing their Wills). Which leads me to a new question. My Ayling ancestors' graves are concentrated in the two small churchyards of St. James in Stedham and All Hallows in Woolbeding. Has anyone in SFHG ever mapped the headstones in terms of the placement clusters? SFHG does have a list of headstone inscriptions for St. James, but I think it would be even more useful to know that placement context. Obviously there are less Wills and baptisms as you go into the 1500's so I am exploring whatever alternatives I can find. Thanks for any help you might offer, and thanks to all who take the time to reply to other posts. I am learning lots just "listening in" to the advice given to others. Chris Ayling Cranbrook, BC Canada -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [SFHG] Error in THE AYLING STORY by Kenneth Ayling 1983 Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2014 20:34:58 -0600 From: Chris Ayling via [1]<sfhg@rootsweb.com> Reply-To: Chris Ayling [2]<ayling1@telus.net> To: [3]SFHG@rootsweb.com Hi there. Anyone investigating the AYLING surname has probably come across "The Ayling Story" by Kenneth Ayling. It's an excellent book. I've found my line does link up with the lineage he chooses to highlight in his story --namely, Thomas Ayling (B. 1689). However, Kenneth indicated that Thomas' father was William (B. 1649). This turns out to be incorrect as William died in 1653 according to the annotation added to his baptism record. Also Nicholas Ayling (B1593) the supposed father of William states in his own Last Will & Testament (written in 1665) William and "the sonne of my sonne William" which is unlikely given that William (B. 1649) would have been only 16 years old at that time. I thought I would post to this group in the event someone has already worked this out? If so, please let me know. Thanks alot! Chris Ayling, Cranbrook BC Canada P.S. For anyone coming across this post in future I have my lineage consistent with "The Ayling Story" line on ancestry.com under "2014 Ayling Tree Sussex UK to Canada". I have a second tree called "2014 Ayling Tree Sussex UK to Canada - Alternate Line to 'The Ayling Story'" where, hopefully, I will be able to sort out the correct line. No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - [1]www.avg.com Version: 2014.0.4765 / Virus Database: 4015/8190 - Release Date: 09/10/14 No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - [4]www.avg.com Version: 2014.0.4765 / Virus Database: 4189/8482 - Release Date: 10/30/14 References 1. mailto:sfhg@rootsweb.com 2. mailto:ayling1@telus.net 3. mailto:SFHG@rootsweb.com 4. http://www.avg.com/

1882 Fred Paskett with Martha, Walter, Ernest, Alice & Jane,1yr arrive Port of New York 25th April. Yo should be able to view them on Ellis Island site, sorry must go. meant this to go with previous email. Was called away. Wendy On Friday, 31 October 2014, 7:24, wendy miles via <sfhg@rootsweb.com> wrote: There is this Frederick: England Births and Christenings, 1538-1975 Frederick Peskett christening: 10 October 1842 ALBOURNE,SUSSEX,ENGLAND Pts:Frederick Peskett+ Emma ............ Fredrick Peskett, 8 c.1843 Relation: Son pts: Fredrick Peskett+ Emma Peskett Where born: Hurstpierpoint, Sussex, England Civil Parish: Hurstpierpoint HO107; Piece: 1642; Folio: 468; Page: 6 On Friday, 31 October 2014, 1:44, Gerald Peskett via <sfhg@rootsweb.com> wrote: Hello listers, I'm wondering if someone might be able to find a lost family. I'm looking for Frederick Peskett and his wife Martha Thorpe. Frederick was born about 1842 in Albourne and was described as a gardener. Martha was born about 1841 in Edburton. They appear in the 1871 census in Hurstpierpoint and 1881 census in Rotherfield. The children I have for the couple are: Abigail 1866, Edburton Walter William, 1868 Edburton Ernest 1871, Hurstpierpoint Lawrence 1874 (born in Steyning District) buried Oct 15 1874 in Portslade Alice 1876 Portslade Albert 1881 Eridge Green But that's the end of them. I can't find any listing of marriages or death for any of the family members, nor do they appear on the following censuses. Their disappearance leads me to believe that they must have emigrated, but to where I don't know. Any help in finding them would be greatly appreciated. Gerald 13311 ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to SFHG-request@rootsweb.com 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 SFHG-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

There is this Frederick: England Births and Christenings, 1538-1975 Frederick Peskett christening: 10 October 1842 ALBOURNE,SUSSEX,ENGLAND Pts:Frederick Peskett+ Emma ............ Fredrick Peskett, 8 c.1843 Relation: Son pts: Fredrick Peskett+ Emma Peskett Where born: Hurstpierpoint, Sussex, England Civil Parish: Hurstpierpoint HO107; Piece: 1642; Folio: 468; Page: 6 On Friday, 31 October 2014, 1:44, Gerald Peskett via <sfhg@rootsweb.com> wrote: Hello listers, I'm wondering if someone might be able to find a lost family. I'm looking for Frederick Peskett and his wife Martha Thorpe. Frederick was born about 1842 in Albourne and was described as a gardener. Martha was born about 1841 in Edburton. They appear in the 1871 census in Hurstpierpoint and 1881 census in Rotherfield. The children I have for the couple are: Abigail 1866, Edburton Walter William, 1868 Edburton Ernest 1871, Hurstpierpoint Lawrence 1874 (born in Steyning District) buried Oct 15 1874 in Portslade Alice 1876 Portslade Albert 1881 Eridge Green But that's the end of them. I can't find any listing of marriages or death for any of the family members, nor do they appear on the following censuses. Their disappearance leads me to believe that they must have emigrated, but to where I don't know. Any help in finding them would be greatly appreciated. Gerald 13311 ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to SFHG-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Hello listers, I'm wondering if someone might be able to find a lost family. I'm looking for Frederick Peskett and his wife Martha Thorpe. Frederick was born about 1842 in Albourne and was described as a gardener. Martha was born about 1841 in Edburton. They appear in the 1871 census in Hurstpierpoint and 1881 census in Rotherfield. The children I have for the couple are: Abigail 1866, Edburton Walter William, 1868 Edburton Ernest 1871, Hurstpierpoint Lawrence 1874 (born in Steyning District) buried Oct 15 1874 in Portslade Alice 1876 Portslade Albert 1881 Eridge Green But that's the end of them. I can't find any listing of marriages or death for any of the family members, nor do they appear on the following censuses. Their disappearance leads me to believe that they must have emigrated, but to where I don't know. Any help in finding them would be greatly appreciated. Gerald 13311

I do not know if it is fixed yet but some of the salehurst and ticehurst entries were put in wrong another another parish so the ordinances seem to be done at a nother parish to the east (can't remember the name). If there are breaks - it may also be a good transcription but put in the wrong place. From: "msdennet@bigpond.net.au via" <sfhg@rootsweb.com> To: Annie Woodward <anniepente@hotmail.com>; "SFHG@rootsweb.com" <sfhg@rootsweb.com> Sent: Monday, September 8, 2014 10:03 PM Subject: Re: [SFHG] Parish Registers I have a similar query. Our website has Sedlescombe Dennett baptisms from 1572 to 1892, but none from 1601 to 1746. Can anyone explain? Mal 12397 ----- Reply message ----- From: "Annie Woodward via" <sfhg@rootsweb.com> To: "SFHG" <sfhg@rootsweb.com> Subject: [SFHG] Parish Registers Date: Tue, Sep 9, 2014 2:46 AM Maybe a very obvious question to most, but recently I'm puzzled by entries I'd expect to see in west Sussex parish registers which don't appear to be there.  Can anyone tell me whether all our west Sussex baps and burials are on the SFHG [members only] website please, or are there still some to be transcribed............OR, are some on CDs but NOT on the website? Confused.  Would like to see a listing of all parishes yet to be transcribed if poss. Many thanks Annie Woodward11632            ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to SFHG-request@rootsweb.com 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 SFHG-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

One note - when I have done transcriptions in parish registers during the mid 1600's (civil war if I remember correctly)  - often no record was kept and after that period sometimes whole families would come in and have their information entered - possibly for inheritance reasons?? because it was usually the more well to do families that had their past information added. It would by no means be complete. In order to see if this is the situation, one would have to look at the original microfilm of the parish register. The whole register would have to be checked because additions like that can be stuck in anywhere and often do not show up where expected. Beverly From: Annie Woodward via <sfhg@rootsweb.com> To: SFHG <sfhg@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tuesday, September 9, 2014 1:33 PM Subject: [SFHG] gaps in registers Dear listers Thanks for your comments thus far. Of course I totally understand that old registers can sometimes be too difficult to handle, transcribe or simply lost etc etc.  However, I would personally really appreciate some kind of 'statement' on the SFHG website as to why when there's a gap, or no record at all e.g.  I need information from Thakeham but baps are not there after 1663- why? [very interesting to see that they are mentioned by TNA as being held at WSRO:  http://apps.nationalarchives.gov.uk/a2a/records.aspx?cat=182-parb&cid=-1#-1   Likewise no records for Washington at all and nothing for West Tarring after 1837. Just some guidance on whether it's useless to look further because they simply don't exist or that they still haven't been transcribed would help.  Who knows, it may even persuade researchers to offer their services in transcribing! Annie11632                         ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to SFHG-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

I hadn't checked my email for a while so not sure if you were aware - but sometimes there is both a parish register and bishops transcripts and I have found instances where the priest "remembered" something left out of the parish register and placed it on the bishops transcripts that were sent in. And sometimes things are inadvertantly left off the bishops transcripts. It is therefore very valuable to check bothBeverly From: Annie Woodward via <sfhg@rootsweb.com> To: Christine Jackson <jackson_cf@yahoo.com>; SFHG <sfhg@rootsweb.com> Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2014 2:49 AM Subject: Re: [SFHG] gaps in registers Thanks Christine- I'm aware that the LDS Family Search site has the baptisms which is why I'm querying the fact that there are none on SFHG after 1663.  Maybe they're in process of being transcribed?  I don't like to rely too heavily on Family Search without the 'back up' of the registers. Again, I return to my point- it would be useful if there was a note against Thakeham for instance, to say that there ARE registers up to 1903 and that they will be, or are in the process of, being transcribed for our SFHG site. I think the SFHG site is generally very good and we are lucky to reap the benefits of all the hard work put into it over the years by willing volunteers and hope that my comments are considered helpful..........and how about this?.......I'll volunteer some time at Chichester to help transcribe some of these missing registers if it would be helpful? Annie Woodward11632 Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2014 13:20:28 -0700 From: jackson_cf@yahoo.com Subject: Re: [SFHG] gaps in registers To: anniepente@hotmail.com; sfhg@rootsweb.com Hi AnnieI'm surprised you cannot access any Thakeham baptisms after 1663.If you go to the FamilySearch site, you'll find that the Church of LDS/Mormons microfilmed all the baptisms from the 1500s up to 1903 - see "Film notes" at https://familysearch.org/search/catalog/273264?availability=Family%20History%20LibraryIf they were filmed, then they must be in the database and you should be able to find the post-1663 entries at the FamilySearch.org site. Christine Jackson SFHG 397        From: Annie Woodward via <sfhg@rootsweb.com> To: SFHG <sfhg@rootsweb.com>  Sent: Tuesday, September 9, 2014 3:33 PM Subject: [SFHG] gaps in registers  Dear listersThanks for your comments thus far.Of course I totally understand that old registers can sometimes be too difficult to handle, transcribe or simply lost etc etc.  However, I would personally really appreciate some kind of 'statement' on the SFHG website as to why when there's a gap, or no record at all e.g.  I need information from Thakeham but baps are not there after 1663- why? [very interesting to see that they are mentioned by TNA as being held at WSRO:  http://apps.nationalarchives.gov.uk/a2a/records.aspx?cat=182-parb&cid=-1#-1   Likewise no records for Washington at all and nothing for West Tarring after 1837.Just some guidance on whether it's useless to look further because they simply don't exist or that they still haven't been transcribed would help.  Who knows, it may even persuade researchers to offer their services in transcribing!Annie11632                            -------------------------------To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to SFHG-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the b! ody of the message                            ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to SFHG-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Arthur Backshall married Julia Lee march qtr 1894 Horsham Alice Julia Backshall birth Dec qtr 1894 East Grinstead A don't have Ancestry but I found with, no details Alice Backshall born abt 1895 with a Arthur and Julia Backshall part of the household. I would look in the 1891, 1901 and 1911 census.e Heather On 28 Oct 2014, at 09:22, Rex Tester via wrote: > At the weekend I attended a family get together, at which were hundreds of > photos, unfortunately I didn't get to see half of them. However, one that > I have never seen was a wedding of "Alli & Alf - 1921". Most of my grand > parents and family were there. These names are not known to me. > There was also a single photo of a lady Julia BACKSHALL, and is sitting > next to the bride in the wedding photo. > I have been looking for alternatives for Allie & ALf and assume them to be > Alice & Alfred and perhaps the bride maybe Alice BACKSHALL, but my searches > failed to find any matches. > Can any of you assist with find them, which may lead to new branch of my > tree? > Rex > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to SFHG-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

In the GRO Marriage Index for 1921 as per Ancestry, there is a marriage between Alfred E. TASKER and Alice J. BACKSHALL in 1921 Q3 ref Cuckfield 2b 425. Could that be the one? It's too recent to appear on FamilySearch and the Cuckfield RD at this date covers a wide area in Mid-Sussex, including Haywards Heath. This means that you will have a long search through the various parish registers, but you will find a list of parishes at http://www.ukbmd.org.uk/genuki/reg/districts/cuckfield.html . Best wishes, Marion Woolgar Bognor Regis, West Sussex SFHG Member No: 3323

Rex, How old would you say Julia is ? 20's, 30's 40's ? You may have seen the 1911 census entry where there is Arthur and Julia (aged 39) Blackshall with daughter Alice (aged 16). Following on, there is a marriage in 1921 in the Cuckfield area between Alice J Blackshall and Alfred E Tasker. Regards, Brian -----Original Message----- From: sfhg-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:sfhg-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Rex Tester via Sent: 28 October 2014 09:23 To: List SFHG Subject: [SFHG] Backshall At the weekend I attended a family get together, at which were hundreds of photos, unfortunately I didn't get to see half of them. However, one that I have never seen was a wedding of "Alli & Alf - 1921". Most of my grand parents and family were there. These names are not known to me. There was also a single photo of a lady Julia BACKSHALL, and is sitting next to the bride in the wedding photo. I have been looking for alternatives for Allie & ALf and assume them to be Alice & Alfred and perhaps the bride maybe Alice BACKSHALL, but my searches failed to find any matches. Can any of you assist with find them, which may lead to new branch of my tree? Rex ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to SFHG-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2015.0.5315 / Virus Database: 4189/8467 - Release Date: 10/28/14

At the weekend I attended a family get together, at which were hundreds of photos, unfortunately I didn't get to see half of them. However, one that I have never seen was a wedding of "Alli & Alf - 1921". Most of my grand parents and family were there. These names are not known to me. There was also a single photo of a lady Julia BACKSHALL, and is sitting next to the bride in the wedding photo. I have been looking for alternatives for Allie & ALf and assume them to be Alice & Alfred and perhaps the bride maybe Alice BACKSHALL, but my searches failed to find any matches. Can any of you assist with find them, which may lead to new branch of my tree? Rex

They are four different archive repositories where manorial court rolls can usually be found. The British Museum used to house the British Library which holds archives as well as books. The British Library is now a separate institution. http://searcharchives.bl.uk/primo_library/libweb/action/search.do?dscnt=1&fromLogin=true&dstmp=1414171721970&vid=IAMS_VU2&fromLogin=true&fromLogin=true The Public Record Office is now The National Archives. http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk Lambeth probably refers to Lambeth Palace Library - the archives of the archdiocese of Canterbury. http://www.lambethpalacelibrary.org/content/searchcollections "In private possession" means what it says. Manorial court rolls can usually be found in one of the above, although those in private possession have often found their way to county record offices in recent years. The reference on the Gazetteer is a generic one for manorial records - not a specific one for Ardingly. On 24 October 2014 18:02, Donna Casey via <sfhg@rootsweb.com> wrote: > Wendy, Thanks very much for taking the time to send this information. > > Of the following, I have information and references on all but > TITTINGHURST 1597 (Court Rolls (unpublished) in the British Museum, Public > Record Office, at Lambeth, and in private possession.) > * Tillinghurst Farm > * Tytyngehurst 1296 SR (p) > * Tytyngesherst 1327 SR (p) > * Tittinghurst 1597 Ct > * Tydingehurst 1340 NI (p) > * Tettinghurst 1665 SRS 17 199 > Does anyone know how I might get the entry/information on that particular > record? > I would be unable to get to the British Museum....I haven't found that > particular "office' on-line to contact. > Anyone have any ideas? > > Donna > > > ________________________________ > From: wendy miles <wmilsa@yahoo.com.au> > To: Donna Casey <donnacasey@yahoo.com>; SFHG SxFamHXGrp < > sfhg-l@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Thursday, October 23, 2014 4:46 PM > Subject: Re: [SFHG] NONARUM INQUISITION Parish Ardingly 1340 - Jurors > and/or payees? > > > > This is as close as I could come Donna, with Tydingehurst & Ardingly etc > on one site > > The Historical Gazetteer of England's Place-names > > > > The Historical Gazetteer of England's Place-names > Citation URI http://placenames.org.uk/id/placename/07/000083 > View on placenames.org.uk Preview by Yahoo > > Perhaps your Tydingehurst has evolved into something different? > > Wendy > > > > On Friday, 24 October 2014, 5:27, Donna Casey via <sfhg@rootsweb.com> > wrote: > > > > I am looking for an on-line book or database in which I might search for > the name of TYDINGEHURST of Ardingly or any place in the Hundred of Streat. > > I have searched the usual places but do not see a span of years which > includes 1340 or Ardingly or Hundred of Streat. > > I have found a statement ..... "in 1340, a John de > Tydingehurst appears as a juror in the Nonarum Inquisition for the parish > of Ardingly, in the Hundred of Streat, which assessed > agricultural taxes for counties in southeastern England." Ref is only > "Nonarum Inquisitions of Sussex". No other way information for finding > the exact information. > > I have tried British > History Online but don't seem to find it. I feel it should appear there. > > Anyone have any suggestions. > > Donna TILLINGHAST Casey > Michigan, USA > > ________________________________ > > > > The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it will > change; the realist adjusts the sails. > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > SFHG-request@rootsweb.com 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 > SFHG-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes > in the subject and the body of the message >

Assuming that you have checked all the neighbouring parish burial registers, you might like to consider that the burial took place in a civil cemetery. There is one in Portslade, one in Hove and several in Brighton. Brighton & Hove City Council own & maintain them all and you will find all the details at http://www.brighton-hove.gov.uk/content/community-and-life-events/deaths-fun erals-and-cemeteries/brighton-hove-portslade-cemeteries ; that's a very long URL, so you may need to copy and paste it into your browser to make sure that you get to the correct page. The office for enquiries is at Woodvale Crematorium and their E-mail address is woodvale@brighton-hove.gov.uk . Hove Cemetery is also known as Aldrington Cemetery and the cemetery burial registers are deposited at The Keep for the period Jan 1882 to Sep 1926 under ref: DO/A34 . Be aware that the other cemetery registers are not deposited and there is a substantial search fee for obtaining details of any grave. See http://www.brighton-hove.gov.uk/sites/brighton-hove.gov.uk/files/WV%20fees%2 02014-15.pdf for further details. There is also a cemetery at nearby Southwick and that is maintained by Adur District Council. It is in West Sussex, but if you don't find your family elsewhere, it might be worth thinking about searching here as Southwick & Portslade are adjacent parishes. Details will be found at http://www.adur-worthing.gov.uk/cemeteries-and-crematorium/cemeteries/southw ick-cemetery/ and they also have a link to their contact page. Their registers have not been deposited, but I found the staff very helpful when I contacted them earlier this year about Shoreham Cemetery. All they need is a name and date of death and they do not make a charge for searching their registers. Best wishes, Marion Woolgar Bognor Regis, West Sussex SFHG Member No: 3323

Thanks Ruth, That sorts it out for me in a clearer way. Although I will be in London next Spring...it would be very nice to have this found before then. Will follow up and thanks again for taking the time. donna The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it will change; the realist adjusts the sails. ----- Original Message ----- From: Ruth Selman via <sfhg@rootsweb.com> To: SFHG SxFamHXGrp <sfhg-l@rootsweb.com> Cc: Sent: Friday, October 24, 2014 1:34 PM Subject: Re: [SFHG] British Museum Public Record Office? How to Contact? They are four different archive repositories where manorial court rolls can usually be found. The British Museum used to house the British Library which holds archives as well as books. The British Library is now a separate institution. http://searcharchives.bl.uk/primo_library/libweb/action/search.do?dscnt=1&fromLogin=true&dstmp=1414171721970&vid=IAMS_VU2&fromLogin=true&fromLogin=true The Public Record Office is now The National Archives. http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk Lambeth probably refers to Lambeth Palace Library - the archives of the archdiocese of Canterbury. http://www.lambethpalacelibrary.org/content/searchcollections "In private possession" means what it says. Manorial court rolls can usually be found in one of the above, although those in private possession have often found their way to county record offices in recent years. The reference on the Gazetteer is a generic one for manorial records - not a specific one for Ardingly. On 24 October 2014 18:02, Donna Casey via <sfhg@rootsweb.com> wrote: > Wendy, Thanks very much for taking the time to send this information. > > Of the following, I have information and references on all but > TITTINGHURST 1597 (Court Rolls (unpublished) in the British Museum, Public > Record Office, at Lambeth, and in private possession.) > * Tillinghurst Farm > * Tytyngehurst 1296 SR (p) > * Tytyngesherst 1327 SR (p) > * Tittinghurst 1597 Ct > * Tydingehurst 1340 NI (p) > * Tettinghurst 1665 SRS 17 199 > Does anyone know how I might get the entry/information on that particular > record? > I would be unable to get to the British Museum....I haven't found that > particular "office' on-line to contact. > Anyone have any ideas? > > Donna > > > ________________________________ > From: wendy miles <wmilsa@yahoo.com.au> > To: Donna Casey <donnacasey@yahoo.com>; SFHG SxFamHXGrp < > sfhg-l@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Thursday, October 23, 2014 4:46 PM > Subject: Re: [SFHG] NONARUM INQUISITION Parish Ardingly 1340 - Jurors > and/or payees? > > > > This is as close as I could come Donna, with Tydingehurst & Ardingly etc > on one site > > The Historical Gazetteer of England's Place-names > > > > The Historical Gazetteer of England's Place-names > Citation URI http://placenames.org.uk/id/placename/07/000083 > View on placenames.org.uk Preview by Yahoo > > Perhaps your Tydingehurst has evolved into something different? > > Wendy > > > > On Friday, 24 October 2014, 5:27, Donna Casey via <sfhg@rootsweb.com> > wrote: > > > > I am looking for an on-line book or database in which I might search for > the name of TYDINGEHURST of Ardingly or any place in the Hundred of Streat. > > I have searched the usual places but do not see a span of years which > includes 1340 or Ardingly or Hundred of Streat. > > I have found a statement ..... "in 1340, a John de > Tydingehurst appears as a juror in the Nonarum Inquisition for the parish > of Ardingly, in the Hundred of Streat, which assessed > agricultural taxes for counties in southeastern England." Ref is only > "Nonarum Inquisitions of Sussex". No other way information for finding > the exact information. > > I have tried British > History Online but don't seem to find it. I feel it should appear there. > > Anyone have any suggestions. > > Donna TILLINGHAST Casey > Michigan, USA > > ________________________________ > > > > The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it will > change; the realist adjusts the sails. > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > SFHG-request@rootsweb.com 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 > SFHG-request@rootsweb.com 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 SFHG-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Wendy, Thanks very much for taking the time to send this information. Of the following, I have information and references on all but TITTINGHURST 1597 (Court Rolls (unpublished) in the British Museum, Public Record Office, at Lambeth, and in private possession.) * Tillinghurst Farm * Tytyngehurst 1296 SR (p) * Tytyngesherst 1327 SR (p) * Tittinghurst 1597 Ct * Tydingehurst 1340 NI (p) * Tettinghurst 1665 SRS 17 199 Does anyone know how I might get the entry/information on that particular record? I would be unable to get to the British Museum....I haven't found that particular "office' on-line to contact. Anyone have any ideas? Donna ________________________________ From: wendy miles <wmilsa@yahoo.com.au> To: Donna Casey <donnacasey@yahoo.com>; SFHG SxFamHXGrp <sfhg-l@rootsweb.com> Sent: Thursday, October 23, 2014 4:46 PM Subject: Re: [SFHG] NONARUM INQUISITION Parish Ardingly 1340 - Jurors and/or payees? This is as close as I could come Donna, with Tydingehurst & Ardingly etc on one site The Historical Gazetteer of England's Place-names The Historical Gazetteer of England's Place-names Citation URI http://placenames.org.uk/id/placename/07/000083 View on placenames.org.uk Preview by Yahoo Perhaps your Tydingehurst has evolved into something different? Wendy On Friday, 24 October 2014, 5:27, Donna Casey via <sfhg@rootsweb.com> wrote: I am looking for an on-line book or database in which I might search for the name of TYDINGEHURST of Ardingly or any place in the Hundred of Streat. I have searched the usual places but do not see a span of years which includes 1340 or Ardingly or Hundred of Streat. I have found a statement ..... "in 1340, a John de Tydingehurst appears as a juror in the Nonarum Inquisition for the parish of Ardingly, in the Hundred of Streat, which assessed agricultural taxes for counties in southeastern England." Ref is only "Nonarum Inquisitions of Sussex". No other way information for finding the exact information. I have tried British History Online but don't seem to find it. I feel it should appear there. Anyone have any suggestions. Donna TILLINGHAST Casey Michigan, USA ________________________________ The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it will change; the realist adjusts the sails. ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to SFHG-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message