This is a "How many angels fit on the head of a pin" situation, but although it may seem very petty and pedantic, it is important to ME.
Years ago, I started to research Owd Timothy o't' Looms, a locally famous man about whom much has been written and many trees constructed - he is, I suppose, a gateway ancestor.
Many pundits gave his baptism date as 22 July 1700 and the LDS have transcribed this date from extracted records.
I checked the PR - no such baptism on that date or any other date. However, at the very back of the register was a list compiled by the Vicar, of
"Children born but not baptised according to the ceremonies of the Established Church" (there was a fine payable for non baptism between 1697 and 1706) and my man was there:
22 July 1700 Timothy Holden, son of James Holden, a webster of Over Darwen.
I entered into extensive correspondence with the Archivist at Lancs RO, who agreed with me that this "supplementary register" should be catalogued separately, as it recorded NON baptisms, not baptisms.
Discussing this on another forum recently, a researcher, for whom I have the greatest respect, who transcribed the original register for the Lancs Family History Society, says he has the entry which reads:
22nd July 1700, Timothy, BAPTISED son of James Holden of Over Darwen.
You can see that these two entries differ. What on earth am I to think? Mine is a photocopy of the original register (via an LDS film).
Neither entry has come from Bishops Transcripts.
I shall have to get the flaming film out AGAIN, which is a bit pointless, as I have already photocopied this entry.
As I said, head of a pin stuff, but it IS important, because I have traced Timothy's parents on the strength of his father being a webster, not a weaver as every other James Holden was at the time, and some of this depends on Timothy being born considerably earlier than July 1700.
Sorry, just needed to vent my anguish!
OC
Years ago, I started to research Owd Timothy o't' Looms, a locally famous man about whom much has been written and many trees constructed - he is, I suppose, a gateway ancestor.
Many pundits gave his baptism date as 22 July 1700 and the LDS have transcribed this date from extracted records.
I checked the PR - no such baptism on that date or any other date. However, at the very back of the register was a list compiled by the Vicar, of
"Children born but not baptised according to the ceremonies of the Established Church" (there was a fine payable for non baptism between 1697 and 1706) and my man was there:
22 July 1700 Timothy Holden, son of James Holden, a webster of Over Darwen.
I entered into extensive correspondence with the Archivist at Lancs RO, who agreed with me that this "supplementary register" should be catalogued separately, as it recorded NON baptisms, not baptisms.
Discussing this on another forum recently, a researcher, for whom I have the greatest respect, who transcribed the original register for the Lancs Family History Society, says he has the entry which reads:
22nd July 1700, Timothy, BAPTISED son of James Holden of Over Darwen.
You can see that these two entries differ. What on earth am I to think? Mine is a photocopy of the original register (via an LDS film).
Neither entry has come from Bishops Transcripts.
I shall have to get the flaming film out AGAIN, which is a bit pointless, as I have already photocopied this entry.
As I said, head of a pin stuff, but it IS important, because I have traced Timothy's parents on the strength of his father being a webster, not a weaver as every other James Holden was at the time, and some of this depends on Timothy being born considerably earlier than July 1700.
Sorry, just needed to vent my anguish!
OC
Comment