Henry hitchcock 1763 devon

[Pirate77]

DO YOU LIKE A PUZZLE? I have always believed my ancestor Henry Hitchcock to have married Deborah Sanders, both from the village of Colaton Raleigh Devon and had a daughter Martha1790 and two sons George1793 and John1799.
However since pouring over the Church records for East Budleigh (online @ DFHS) it would seem that George was the son of Henry & Sarah ! no sign of a George born to Henry & Deborah! It could be that Deborah was Sarah and Visa versa,a bad transcription perhaps or it could be that dozens of family trees' particularly on Ancestry are in fact all wrong! If so can anyone help me prove where George Hitchcock1793 who married Martha Pidgeon came from and whether his mother was Deborah or sarah?

Many thanks.

[Katarzyna]

Where did you get this original information re "I have always believed my ancestor Henry Hitchcock to have married Deborah Sanders, both from the village of Colaton Raleigh Devon and had a daughter Martha1790 and two sons George1793 and John1799."

This is what you have I guess. - Henry Hitchcock married Deborah Sanders 13 Nov 1789 East Budleigh Devon (DFHS)

[Pirate77]

Thanks for replying Katarzyna, My uncles some years ago spent a lot of time researching their Hitchcock lineage, living in the area helped as Church records, grave yards, records office etc. were all extensively examined. They were both retired at the time and it became a kind of obsession, alas they are no longer alive themselves now for me to ask! I was just expecting to find in the records transcribed by DFHS for East Budleigh Devon a birth for George Hitchcock 1793ish to Henry & Deborah, to my surprise the only George in the list is to Henry & Sarah!. Lots of possibilities of course she could be Deborah Sarah Sanders or Sarah Deborah Sanders(they did have an irritating knack for misinterpreting misspelling and changing names around back in those days as well as forgetting exact birthdays etc.! or as I have found quite often families weren't always conformist so George may not have been recorded, or as there are few records particularly early records of Hitchcocks in the DFHS transcriptions for East Budleigh maybe they were bordering with other registration districts ? I really am at a cross roads with this question. I don't think it possible to obtain a birth cert for George as its pre 1837. I just feel the answer is hiding there somewhere. An awful lot of family histories on the site Ancestry have this connection, can they all be wrong? Did they all crib information from each other? I really don't know!
I am grateful for your interest and reply, if you feel you can help further in any way or suggest someone who could , it would be most welcome.

Kind regards,

Robin.

[Darksecretz]

Hello Robin, welcome to the forum :smilee:

it might be that Sarah was mistranscribed as Deborah..?? if there was an ink splodge or something over the first part of the name so it might be .....rah which might have lead to the mix up?

if you dont live local, then you could order the film from the LDS to view at one of their centres, or goto an archives and look at the prs there. it might be that the uncles have made an assumption somewhere, the only way is to re-trace and prove it one way or another. (and yes it is quite possible that most of the families that have it all mixed up on Ancestry have copied off one another without backing their proof up and checking it)

[Pirate77]

Hello Julie, thanks for your reply, I have e-mailed Elizabeth Howard who transcribed the church records that appear on line at DFHS to see if she would check that particular transcription again for me. Hopefully it will provide an answer, if not, Oh dear I'm in trouble !

I havn't uploaded family tree GEDCOM yet as I feel I should resolve this problem first and before others copy it !

Thanks again and please do let me know if you have any more ideas as to how I might solve this puzzle.

Robin

[kylejustin]

i should think the priest just heard her name wrong, particurly if he didnt catch the name, then assumed sarah instead of deborah. i actually have 2 sarah's registered within 2 years of each other, the first was actually nora, she appears in lots of documentation, and there is no death for either 'sarah', bith married and died int heir 90's!!

[Olde Crone Holden]

I'd take a bet it's the same woman - both names end in "rah" and if you write "Deborah" and Sarah" in copperplate, the outline of the names is almost identical.

OC

[Darksecretz]

No problems Robin, do let us know if anything happens re the query,

I too have relatives that come from Devon, and I always find DFHS very difficult to navigate..

[Pirate77]

Thank you everyone for those reassuring transcription theories and here's another! I've looked again at the transcription list on DFHS and directly underneath Sarah Hitchcock is Sarah Williams! do think Elizabeth Howard when transcribing this book was getting a little tired perhaps?
Adding credence to the theory, further on in the list for 1796 is Mary Hitchcock daughter of William & Deborah, directly underneath an entry for William & Sarah! hhmmm!

And another, could William have been a William Henry a very common naming back then?

The reason I think these are transcription errors from Priests entry to current day interpretation is that only 4 Hitchcock children were born in the same registration district 1759 to 1812 nicely spaced out: Martha 1790 dau of Henry+Deborah, George1793 son of Henry+Sarah, Mary1796 dau of William+Deborah, John1799 son of Henry+Deborah.
(acually there is one other, William1796 son of Samuel+Grace Hitchcock,born the same year as Mary would most likely suggest different family)

Still hoping to solve this mystery for sure and hoping Elizabeth Howard DFHS will reply to my e-mail. Will let you know on if I succeed in the meantime always happy to receive theories and direction!

Kind regards,

Robin.

[Katarzyna]

Have you tried looking further back in the transcriptions to see if Henry's baptism is there and if he had brothers William and Samuel? The transcripts start at 1759 at Colaton.


But Colaton Raleigh is a seperate parish to East Budleigh. Perhaps you will find their births there as it looks like they moved to East Budleigh prior to marriage. These records start at 1673.

I have a feeling like the others that this is a transcription error - those old books are sometimes extremely difficult to decypher.

Do let us know if you hear from the DFHS. Good luck

[Sunny Rosy]

I don't know exactly when I am next going to the Devon records office, but could have look for you to see if I can find the answers for you., if you can bear with me.

sunny

[Pirate77]

Elizabeth Howard has transcribed Baptisms,Marriages,Burials for the Sub District of East Budleigh on the DFHS website covering 1556-1812. I have assumed (maybe rightly or wrongly) that it would have included all Civil Parishes within that boundry for e.g. Colaton Raleigh, Woodbury,Woodbury Salterton,Budleigh salterton, Otterton etc.
There are gaps in each mainly between the years 1652-1678(must be a reason for this!) but could find only the 5 baptism entries for Hitchcocks previously mentioned.

Am I correct in saying that Civil Parishes for e.g.Colaton Raliegh comes under the Sub District of East Budleigh which in turn comes under the Registration District of St.Thomas? or am I missing something?

Thanks again

Robin

[Pirate77]

Hi Sunny, That's fantastic and a very kind offer! can I provide you with any more info that might help? I should upload a GEDCOM here but as previously mentioned a little reluctant to do so until this problem is resolved as i don't really want to place incorrect information into the public domain. I use Family Historian 4.1 and Tree stands at close to 800 names at the moment. If I were to e-mail you the file do you have the means (software) to open it?

Look forward to hearing from you and thanks again,

Robin

[Katarzyna]

Civil Registration Districts were created 1/7/ 1837.

http://www.genuki.org.uk/big/eng/civreg/

Before that each parish would have it's own church records. That is why you would need to look at the parish records for Colaton Raleigh. These may fall within the Sub District of East Budleigh that they have transcribed but you could look on there to see if Colaton is included. It should say which parishes have been transcribed.
You are correct in that Colaton falls within the St Thomas Reg Dist for Civil Registration from 1837 - 1936. After that it became Devon Central.

[Pirate77]

Hi Every one, just had this reply back from Elizabeth Howard who transcribed the Church Records for East Budleigh and thought you might be interested.

Hi, sorry not to have been able to get back quicker ..........you are right and I see that I have got Deborah as Sarah , and I am guessing I had a stab at a very unreadable name and took the last three letters and put SA with rah instead of Debo........it may be that the parish clerk had abbreviated Deborah to D`brah , I don`t have the microfiche of the originals now .........to be absolutely certain you would need to ask DRO to check the microfilm , it shouldn`t take a minute as you have the names and dates , so they may not charge you . Hitchcock wasn`t a name I had in my family nor one that I recognised , but that still isn`t any excuse !!!

Needless to say I'm extremely happy tonight!

[Darksecretz]

Oh thats a brilliant outcome Robin, well done :smilee:

[Sunny Rosy]

Robin. do you still want me do do lookups for you or are you sorted?

sunny

[Pirate77]

Hi Sunny, my apologies for not contacting you asap, I thought I had by PM but as the new boy here am still getting used to navigating my way around! Did you get the original reply from me?
As Elizabeth Howard suggested it might be a good idea just to have a look at the original fiche assuming you are still happy to do so? and I'm guessing this would finally put this question for many reasearching Hitchcocks to bed once and for all!

Best wishes,

Robin.

[Katarzyna]

oh great news!!! you must be thrilled to get that sorted.