Key to Ancient Parish Registers

[Cornish Terrier]

I have just been led to a book that provides some information of interest to us all. This book is available from download at archive.org:-

ia700504.us.archive.org/2/items/keytoancientpari00burkuoft/keytoancientpari00burkuoft.pdf

It is called 'A Key to the Ancient Parish Registers of England and Wales' and it is, as by its name, simply a guide to these old documents. I found an interesting quote on page 7:-

Three years after his appointment Cromwell issued Injunctions that a book and a coffer with two locks should be provided for each parish in England and Wales, and the parson of the parish was ordered to write every Sunday in the presence of the Churchwardens, or one of them, and record in the book all baptisms, marriages and burialsof the immediately preceding week. In case of neglect a fine of three shillings and fourpence was imposed, to be applied to the repair of the church.

Note that this was to be done every Sunday! I have not read the entire document as yet but a glance at a page here and there indicates that this book may be useful to many of us when we lament the 'missing record' that we have all now doubt curse from time to time!

CT

[donne]

The book sounds very useful, CT - I haven't come across it before. I will follow up the link you have provided.

Unfortunately Cromwell's edict quoted in your post doesn't seem to have ensured accurate record keeping. As many of us know to our cost, there are often gaps in parish records during the Commonwealth. I am always amused by the lament in the marriage register for St. Mary Magdalene, Launceston, which has been transcribed into Phillimore's, and which says:
"Hereafter follow marriages by Laymen according to the prophanes and giddynes of the times, without precedent or example in any Christian Kingdom or Commonwealth from the Birth of Christ unto this very year 1655".

Whoops! I've had a look at the document now and I see CT's quote refers to Thomas Cromwell and not Oliver! I see Oliver Cromwell does get a mention in the first paragraph though, which talks about "the Civil War and the usurpation of Oliver Cromwell have combined to render incomplete the series opf Parochial Registers". I'm sure we could all agree about the damage to the record although many would be prepared to argue about the role of Oliver Cromwell in British history.

[Cornish Terrier]

This is an interesting read and offers a description of the required record-keeping through the ages. In itself the book is not really helpful in locating ancestors but it does offer an explanation of why records might be missing.

The main point I was making in my initial post was that the instructions by Cromwell back in around 1538 were that EVERY SUNDAY the record of baptisms, marriages and burials had to be entered into the register in the presence of at least one Churchwarden.

That tends to give some back-up to something I have been saying for some time now - that the details of events may have been written on 'working sheets' and then all entered into the register on a periodic basis. That being the case there can be no guarantee that just one sheet of paper or parchment might have been involved and therefore no guarantee that a record of every event would have been transferred to the parish register.

This would also explain why entries can be found in the Bishops Transcripts but do not appear in the Parish Registers!

CT

[donne]

That's a good point you are making, though I would have thought that a birth marriage or death would have been a noteworthy event in the sparsely populated parishes of West Penwith and less likely to have been forgotten. Not sure about the BTs -surely they would have been compiled from the register entries on a regular (monthly?) basis and so more prone to errors and omissions? Most useful if the original registers are missing or damaged.

[Cornish Terrier]

Not sure about the BTs -surely they would have been compiled from the register entries on a regular (monthly?) basis

BTs were required to be sent to the Bishop on an annual basis and they were to be a copy of the registers. There are a couple of links that offer good information about them with this being one:-

dea.byu.edu/index.php?page=bishoptranscripts

I noted in another description of the BTs that they were required to be copied and sent to the Bishop on a monthly bases so I am not really sure which is correct. However the link above provides other useful information including this:-

The advantage of BTs is twofold. Since they were filed separately from the parish registers, they may survive when the parish registers are missing. More importantly, the BTs may contain more or different information from that found in the parish register.

Yes, there are times when entries from the register do not appear in the BTs ...... BUT I have examples of the exact opposite.

1. In one marriage I looked at recently the fact that one of the participants was 'widow' or 'widower' was recorded in the BTs but not in the original register.
2. I have seen instances where the names of parents or an age are recorded for burials in the BTs but this information does not appear in the register.
3. At Towednack in either the 1780s or 1790s I had a family with two sons of the same name. The earlier I only knew about because his burial had been recorded yet no baptism could be found in either the Hoblyn Transcript or in the CFHS Transcript of Towednack Baptisms. I recently found the baptism of that child in the BTs that I acquired recently!

Where possible it is always advantageous to check the BTs as well as registers not only because some BTs survive where registers don't but also because of the additional (or varying) information that might be found.

CT