Beginning March 2nd, 2020 the Mailing Lists functionality on RootsWeb will be discontinued. Users will no longer be able to send outgoing emails or accept incoming emails. Additionally, administration tools will no longer be available to list administrators and mailing lists will be put into an archival state.
Administrators may save the emails in their list prior to March 2nd. After that, mailing list archives will remain available and searchable on RootsWeb
Alan McGowan wrote:
> Another kind of "double" was achieved by a Gypsy couple Samuel AYERS and
> Charlotte KIRCHER, who married on 12Aug1825 at Micheldever Hampshire, and
> had their child baptized the same day in the adjacent parish of Popham.
Eric Clapton/new Mrs Clapton (sorry, forgotten her name) went one better &
had both ceremonies one after the other in the same church <g>.
Another kind of "double" was achieved by a Gypsy couple Samuel AYERS and
Charlotte KIRCHER, who married on 12Aug1825 at Micheldever Hampshire, and
had their child baptized the same day in the adjacent parish of Popham.
Romany & Traveller Family History Society
----- Original Message -----
From: Roy Stockdill <roystock(a)compuserve.com>
Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2002 10:27 AM
Subject: [SoG] Double
> Have you considered the possibility they may have been gypsies? It was not
> entirely uncommon for vicars to offer "bribes", in the form of clothing or
> money, to couples to have their children baptised into the church -
> recruiting for God with missionary zeal, etc - and some gypsy couples were
> not slow to take advantage of this. Examples of "serial" baptisms to gypsy
> couples are known and in the book "My Ancestors Were Gypsies" (published
> the SoG) Sharon Sillers Floate says the record appears to be held by a
> couple who between 1831 and 1840 had their daughters baptised in 160
> different parishes as far apart as Devon and Yorkshire!!!
> Another reason for perhaps having a child baptised in more than one parish
> was to obtain several settlements for the child, gypsy families being
> constantly on the move.
> Roy Stockdill, Editor, the Journal of One-Name Studies
I noted Barney T-D's comments about FreeBMD and would like to stress the
point about compiling an index from original documents rather than from
someone else's index. Unless you're proposing to check the inputted index
against the originals anyway, and it is questionable whether that saves
List subscribers will be aware of the index of brides and grooms to the
Vicar-General's marriage licences led by David Squire and Colin Allen.
Before this project began, I was given the job of inputting the
Haskett-Smith slip index covering 1694-1709 and 1801-1803 to a PC-File v5
database on a Honeywell-Bull 8088 computer.
The aim of this slip-index project had been to include substantial detail
from the allegations, including not just names of bride and groom, but also
bondsmen and relatives, parishes etc. Imagine my feelings when I realised
that (i) the 1801-1803 index only included groom entries, and was incomplete
anyway; (ii) the 1694-1709 index was prepared by a number of indexers (I
knew this from the handwriting) of varying reliability (I realised entries
were unreliable by being puzzled by some slips and checking those against
the microfilm, discovering some errors and omissions). Unfortunately not all
the data could be checked against the allegations because there was
insufficient volunteer time available, but the bride, groom and date entries
were checked before they were incorporated into the main index.
My feelings when thinking about the amount of volunteer time which had been
put into preparing the original slip index which was then wasted because
volunteer time was not available at the time to complete and check the slip
index: well, the word splenetic comes to mind, as Colin Allen and David
Squire can confirm.
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com
>A very similar thing happened yesterday that I overheard in my local
reference library when a young woman approached the enquiry desk. The
conversation went along these lines.<
Rather like the lady (American) who dashed into the SoG one day and said,
"Have you got my family tree here? I am in a hurry, I have a taxi
In message <NFEBKNGJIFOEHGGFJODJMEEOCGAA.animaus(a)lineone.net>, La
Greenall <animaus(a)lineone.net> writes
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Barney Tyrwhitt-Drake [mailto:Barney@tdrake.demon.co.uk]
>> Sent: 30 January 2002 09:27
>> ...[GRO] indexes are 4th generation indexes derived from the original
>> registers which are what will now be stored in CROs. Seminal works like
>> Mike Foster's 'A comedy of errors' have shown how badly flawed these
>> indexes are. So FreeBMD is by definition going to be an even more flawed
>FreeBMD could serve a very worthy unintended* purpose - so far it appears to
>have been difficult to quantify the scale of errors in the GRO indexes, not
>least due to having only 'piecemeal' access to them. FreeBMD is making whole
>swathes available in a form that would make wholesale evaluation much more
>viable than before, and the work of Mike Foster and others much easier.
>Hopefully this would lead eventually to better versions of the indexes.
A good point. In all of this it pays to think very clearly before you
start out. Do you want to do something because you *can* do it or
because you want to do it the *best* way possible? I would suggest that
FreeBMD took the former view and CheshireBMD took the latter view for
example. I happen to favour the latter approach, but do not seek to deny
that there is at least some value in what FreeBMD has done. Just think
what it could have been though! The same thing holds true with the PRO
and the 1901 census index, albeit with a slightly different perspective.
They were obliged to do it as cheaply as possible by their political
masters and not as well as possible.
P.S. One of the good things in Mike Foster's book is that he does try to
quantify the error rates in the GRO indexes and it does not make
comfortable reading. Sadly his literary style is rather repetitive so I
suspect many will not take the time to work through it, being so
addicted to the world of soap operas and instant everything on the
Internet as we are.
I may be a boring old fart but I like to do things properly. I would
hope that most members of the SoG would take a similar approach.
When was the last time a member was expelled for sloppiness? Oops sorry
I forgot we need the money...
I blame the media for much of this for failing to do any research before
recycling spin. On the 2nd of January the TV journalists told us how we
could instantly find our ancestors in the 1901 census 'at the touch of a
button'. Last Sunday I was quietly minding my own business at the
Bracknell Family History Fair when a lady walks up to me and says
Lady: "I am looking for information on Scotland."
Barney:"Could you please be more specific?"
Lady, after 30 seconds of what passed for thought: "The Hebrides".
Barney, straight-faced and with an aplomb that could get me a job in
Microsoft technical support instantly: "They are a group of islands off
the NW coast of Scotland, that is in the top left hard corner."
No offence was taken as she had a hard time understanding what NW meant.
I directed her to Marjorie Moore on the SoG advice desk. Marjorie
quickly established that she had Internet access and gave her the URL of
the Scots Origins website. She went away happy.
Come back Tony Camp, all is forgiven.
I seem to be getting some responses to my SOG post. When I send replies
they seem to go to THEM rather then the list. Or so I assume. Has Sog etc
as the TO on their message yet repy goes to them....am I missing some thing?
From: "malcolm.brunsdon" <malcolm.brunsdon(a)ntlworld.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2002 11:51 AM
Subject: Re: [SoG] Weeks
> > To Paula,
> > It is quite OK to shout a surname in CAPITALS as that is good genny
> > and makes the surname stand out when looking at a genny board.
> > Brenda
> Do you Have many CAPITALS in your family tree
> sorry just trying to and a bit of humour
A bit of humour....need some. Still, the family tree does have some
"capitol" names in it. I'm still a bit awed by some of them. Margaret
Boleyn, Aunt of Ann, Queen of England, to name one. Saint Margaret of
Scotland. Edward the III, (4 of his children, direct line PLUS widow of
Edward the Black Prince, Joan) Add a few Mortimers, Percy's, Nevilles,
Yes Id say an interesting group of ancestors....oh, another couple William
the Conq., Charlemagne, Alfred the Great............and it appears most of
the Barons of Magna Charta fame...
Dave Bowring wrote.....
>>Has anyone come across a situation where the same person has been
in two different parishes? I have come across what appears to be the same
entry, firstly in the Nottingham St Mary's register and then in the Ault
Hucknall (DBY) register some eight months later. The Ault Hucknall entry
even provides the information that the child was born in Nottingham.
I know that the immediate reaction is to assume two families with the same
names and accept it as a co-incidence. We are doing all we can to determine
if this is the case but wonder if it was something anyone else has come
across and how common a practice it might have been.<<
BESIDES the explanations offered, one other springs to mind.
Have you considered the possibility they may have been gypsies? It was not
entirely uncommon for vicars to offer "bribes", in the form of clothing or
money, to couples to have their children baptised into the church -
recruiting for God with missionary zeal, etc - and some gypsy couples were
not slow to take advantage of this. Examples of "serial" baptisms to gypsy
couples are known and in the book "My Ancestors Were Gypsies" (published by
the SoG) Sharon Sillers Floate says the record appears to be held by a
couple who between 1831 and 1840 had their daughters baptised in 160
different parishes as far apart as Devon and Yorkshire!!!
Another reason for perhaps having a child baptised in more than one parish
was to obtain several settlements for the child, gypsy families being
constantly on the move.
Roy Stockdill, Editor, the Journal of One-Name Studies
Editor, the "My Ancestor..." series (Published by the SoG)
Web page of the Guild of One-Name Studies:- http://www.one-name.org
Newbies' Guide to Genealogy & Family History:-
Never ask a man if he comes from Yorkshire. If he does he will tell you. If
he does not, why humiliate him? - Canon Sydney Smith
In message <000901c1a9db$24093640$576b1e3e@ronan>, Christopher Richards
>Sorry my dyslexia got out and left out your "e". I agree about the
>inaccuracies of the GRO indexes and that an index based on ideally the
>original records would be an ideal. But the GRO indexes are easily
>available unlike the originals, which means that the project has been able
>to get off the ground and will probably get completed in a reasonable time
>scale. So I continue to think it is a worthwhile project and that going for
>the ideal would have meant having nothing.
>I do mean ideally go for the originals - one marriage certificate I got from
>the registrar showed no name for the bridegroom's father. I eventually
>almost by chance looked at the original parish register - the clergyman
>hadn't transcribed his name.
Yes, this kind of error was a lot more common than many suppose. I agree
that getting access to the GRO indexes was easier than getting access to
County Registrars' Registers, but the best things in life are often not
the easiest to obtain. Cheshire, Northumberland and Durham did it. The
rest of us were just too lazy to try or had other projects on the go, I
You will be interested to know that Barney sent me his "converted" copy of
the White Paper as a text file to ?overcome? incompatibilities.
Unfortunately this removed all of the formatting which made the contents
even more abtruse than they are in the original - especially the tables. I
am working on a copy which will go on the SoG web site - as it stands it
is down the 17 pages (but you lose the pic of Ruth Kelly). The tables may
represent a particular problem because in the pdf and printed copy some
bright spark decided to run the table over two pages so it is ISO A3 wide.
Please bear with me I need a bit more time to make it sensible(sic). It was
a good job I saw a copy printed by John Addis Smith yesterday.
Many thanks to all who replied with helpful advice. Some further information
The respective dates were July 1805 in Nottingham and March 1806 in Ault
Ault Hucknall was the parish of the mother's family, Nottingham St Mary's,
the father's parish.
There is nothing in the Nottingham register to suggest a private baptism.
A second child was baptised in Nottingham St Mary's in May 1807.
On balance, I am inclined to think that the baptisms were of the same
child - either
because there was a desire to involve the mother's family or, as Brenda Cox
suggests, to obtain a second Certificate of Residence.
We continue the search!
Re Win XP:
> or Explosive as with all the bugs its bound to blow up.
> Malcolm Brunsdon
Have been using Win XP for 4 weeks now, there are plenty of things about
it I'm not keen on, but one thing it doesn't do is blow up! Much more
stable than previous Windows versions.
Susan Deacon Wokingham, Berks, UK
> use too, and therefore unavailable for a duplicate prog to use. MS Office
> round this, but I have no idea how.
Probably uses a copy version for each application or instance of application
a bit like the temp files have a funny name/number.
I have also come across something similar in two Northamptonshire parishes.
The baptisms of several children of a family appeared in the registers of two
different parishes. The details were identical. The incumbent of both
parishes was the same person.
In a message dated 30/01/02 11:06:28 (MEZ) Mitteleuropäische Zeit,
> Has anyone come across a situation where the same person has been baptised
> in two different parishes? I have come across what appears to be the same
> entry, firstly in the Nottingham St Mary's register and then in the Ault
> Hucknall (DBY) register some eight months later. The Ault Hucknall entry
> even provides the information that the child was born in Nottingham.
> I know that the immediate reaction is to assume two families with the same
> names and accept it as a co-incidence. We are doing all we can to determine
> if this is the case but wonder if it was something anyone else has come
> across and how common a practice it might have been.
> Dave Bowring
Could it not be the case that a child was privately baptised and
subequently 'received' into the church at a later date with both events
being recorded as baptisms in the parish register(s)? Presumably a private
baptism could have occured in a grandparents' parish with the 'receiving'
taking place in the parents 'home' parish.
On Tue, 29 Jan 2002 12:00:22 +0000 (GMT), Malcolm wrote:
>A solution I would consider lies around 6.5 in Barney's list. DCC can be a
>bit fiddly to set up and the serial option is rather slow except for
>modest data transfers (i.e. a few Mb is fine, 100Mb is time consuming, a
>few Gb is bad!). We have a LAN conect between our home PC and laptops but
>even so I recently purchased for about GBP 20 a USB link cable (same
>connector both ends and a lump in the middle that is probably sized to
>impress rather than do anything too fancy!) which connects between two PCs
>and, with the software supplied, allows files to be simply drag&droped
>between the two - and at a speed that compares favourably with an ethernet
But the old PC in question runs Windose 95 ! Even if 95b or c, it is
technically quite a problem to set up a working USB interface . . .
John V Addis-Smith
Thurleigh, Bedfordshire, England
Could we have the texts of the two baptismal entries, please? They may
>Has anyone come across a situation where the same person has been baptised
>in two different parishes? I have come across what appears to be the same
>entry, firstly in the Nottingham St Mary's register and then in the Ault
>Hucknall (DBY) register some eight months later. The Ault Hucknall entry
>even provides the information that the child was born in Nottingham.
>I know that the immediate reaction is to assume two families with the same
>names and accept it as a co-incidence. We are doing all we can to determine
>if this is the case but wonder if it was something anyone else has come
>across and how common a practice it might have been.
I keep telling this site that my son has a back-up always of this the main
file of the whole family. I keep the minor sideline files and bak them up to
floppies fairly regularly.
Have never ever had any trouble with FTMaker until this re-set of my new PC.
Thanks everyone, enough info is enough info. My head is spinning.
Hi everyone who has suggested ways of transferring that huge file. I haven't
understood half of what I have been told ( I have another sort of brain!) but
have printed off most replies.
Think I will invest in a Zip Drive when I can afford it after just getting
the new pC. meantime I will hang on in there until half-term when I am sure
No 1 teacher son will do the trick for his old Mum (not so much of the old
Many thanks. Can we end the subject now please? I am away for a few days