|
Post by maddernancestry on Aug 29, 2013 8:02:10 GMT -5
Thanks Trencom.
Vivian's book on the 3 Visitations lists "Cossen, alias Madern" (p 103) and shows several generations as confirmed by John Maddern in 1620. The subsequent generations also shown have presumably been researched by Vivian - question is whether he had better info for this than we do now?
Any suggestions where to find Stoate's works online? I've searched unsuccessfully.
Re the above discussion on ages, the Muster age started at 16 so was this possibly the "adult" age?
Can anyone advise if there was a convention (or common trend) for recording burials in the parish Registers as to when "son/dau of..." was used instead of the persons surname ?
PM
|
|
|
Post by trencrom on Aug 30, 2013 1:32:15 GMT -5
Thanks Trencrom. Vivian's book on the 3 Visitations lists "Cossen, alias Madern" (p 103) and shows several generations as confirmed by John Maddern in 1620. The subsequent generations also shown have presumably been researched by Vivian - question is whether he had better info for this than we do now? Thanks for that -- i have now seen the relevant page. It looks like the latter part of the pedigree as per Vivian is based on the Madron PRs. Note his remark at the bottom of the page about the frequency of the surname in the area. Any suggestions where to find Stoate's works online? I've searched unsuccessfully. Not sure if it available online. i have only ever used printed editions. Re the above discussion on ages, the Muster age started at 16 so was this possibly the "adult" age? I wouldn't think so. It was probably just the age at which it was felt that somebody was old enough for militia service. Can anyone advise if there was a convention (or common trend) for recording burials in the parish Registers as to when "son/dau of..." was used instead of the persons surname ? PM I am not aware of any convention. I think we can safely assume that "son/dau of" meant an under-age child. What I am not persuaded of is that under-age children were identified as such all the time. I remember looking at the PRs of a certain parish and not seeing much if anything along those lines for some decades in the 18th century; however there were numerous such entries for the decades immediately before and afterwards. Since it is unlikely that under-age deaths dropped dramatically for that intervening period, only to increase later on, it appears that the incumbent in those years did not identify under-age burials as such, whereas his immediate predecessor and immediate successor each did. This is frustrating for us present-day researchers of course. Trencrom
|
|
|
Post by Cornish Terrier on Aug 30, 2013 1:40:10 GMT -5
From my observations the only mandate was that a register was to be kept for the recording of baptisms, marriages and burials. Except for the various marriage acts I don't think there was anything more specific than that until the advent of pre-printed registers. The first of those would have been in 1754 with the Marriage Registers being introduced following the passing of the Hardwicke Act. Around the 1780s some Parishes (e.g. St Ives) began using pre-printed registers for baptisms and burials but it was not until 1813 when this became uniform.
It appears to have been up to the Vicars/Clerks just what and how much information they recorded and if you scan through a register for any Parish you will find that often changed.
CT
|
|
|
Post by hoskinm on Nov 12, 2021 11:33:06 GMT -5
The Cosson name appears in my tree with John Cosson born in 1490 & then the Maddern surname appears with John Cosson Maddern born in 1510, the Cosson name stays for a further 2 generations - John Cosson Maddern born in 1530 & William Cosson Maddern born in 1560 who married a Jayne Polkinhorne they were married in Madron.
Hoskin M
|
|