Brian Apologies - I have noticed that I failed to thank you for your earlier message. At the time I followed the link and very helpful guidance which you gave and I acknowledge that the FamilySearch record is derived from BTs for the Archdeaconry of Sudbury. I imagine that there are a number of possible reasons for the omission of the parish name. Thank you again for your continued interest. Peter Knott ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brian Lummis" <lummis@btinternet.com> To: <suffolk@rootsweb.com> Sent: Saturday, February 12, 2011 10:53 AM Subject: Re: [SFK-UK] Marriage of George Skinner & Catherine Clarke 1776 > Peter Knott <peter.knott@btinternet.com> wrote: >> Hello David >> Thank you for your input. Their children were baptised at St Mary's Bury >> St Edmunds so that marriage location fits perfectly. >> Bury is of course within the Archdeaconry of Sudbury but there does not >> appear to be any substantive reason why new FamilySearch has listed the >> marriage in that way. Listers have suggested that the marriage might have >> been by licence or that the LDS record was taken from Bishops >> Transcripts. >> LDS Help in response to my query merely reported back to me the facts >> that I had given them! > > > Peter > > If you go back to my response of 3rd February you will see that I directed > you to the film which clearly stated that the full title of the film was > "Bishop's transcripts for the > Archdeaconry of Sudbury, 1560-1853". I would guess that the new search > facility has decided to abbreviate this and having given the film number > has > left it up to the researcher to look for the full title. > > Bishops Transcripts are copies of the returns made by each church of the > births marriages and deaths in their parishes. > > Many incumbents - as it was they who could either give or deny > permission - > would not allow the Mormon Church to copy their records and I believe that > this led to the copying of the transcripts so that all could be ordained > into the church. > > It needs to be remembered that the primary purpose of the extracts is not > to > help genealogists but to further the work of the church. This is why you > may > not get the answers you expect when enquiring about the indexes - there is > currently a debate about this on soc.genealogy.britain as it looks as > though > when the old search facility is fully replaced by the new family search > that > there will be no ability to download GEDCOM files. > > Brian > > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > SUFFOLK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message >