Author Topic: Slaley Marriage Look-up (BTs seem to contain error)  (Read 4765 times)

Offline c-side

  • Deceased † Rest In Peace
  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • ********
  • Posts: 3,032
  • The 'three' now have a cousin
    • View Profile
Re: Slaley Marriage Look-up (BTs seem to contain error)
« Reply #9 on: Wednesday 24 September 14 23:26 BST (UK) »
It certainly is weird - or maybe that was the vicar  ;D

I did cast about for a Catherine but didn't see one and there's not much time between the other children for her to fit in.  I wonder whether she was born before they married.

Christine

Offline c-side

  • Deceased † Rest In Peace
  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • ********
  • Posts: 3,032
  • The 'three' now have a cousin
    • View Profile
Re: Slaley Marriage Look-up (BTs seem to contain error)
« Reply #10 on: Wednesday 01 October 14 23:43 BST (UK) »
There is something seriously weird going on with these Slaley records.  I decided to print out the BTs and take them to the archives to compare them with the PRs.

If we take Catherine’s position on the BTs to be the same as John’s in the PRs then immediately preceding that entry we have

William Bell and Isabella Robson do not appear in the PRs
Ann Whitfield, a second John Barron, Thomas Bell and William Teasdale appear in the PRs but not in BTs

Immediately after John’s entry there are Nicholas Makepeace, William Armstrong, Christopher Harrison and Ann Bell.  Only William Armstrong shows up on the BTs

I know this doesn’t help your dilemma but it illustrates that the problem doesn’t just apply to the Roddams

Christine

Offline Jomot

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,673
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Slaley Marriage Look-up (BTs seem to contain error)
« Reply #11 on: Thursday 02 October 14 01:07 BST (UK) »
Many thanks again Christine.

Clearly neither the PRs nor the BTs can be wholly relied upon so I'll have to mark up my notes accordingly and look for more corroborating evidence for the children in particular. 

I wonder what on earth was going on there to make the records so chaotic?  A quick google on the curate Richard Close doesn't turn up anything damning but something clearly wasn't right!  Looks like he moved on to Hunstanworth after Slaley and was also at Whitley Chapel, so if he was the problem then its something to bear in mind.

Julie
MORGAN: Glamorgan, Durham, Ohio. DAVIS/DAVIES/DAVID: Glamorgan, Ohio.  GIBSON: Leicestershire, Durham, North Yorkshire.  RAIN/RAINE: Cumberland.  TAYLOR: North Yorks. BOURDAS: North Yorks. JEFFREYS: Worcestershire & Northumberland. FORBES: Berwickshire, CHEESMOND: Durham/Northumberland. WINTER: Durham/Northumberland. SNOWBALL: Durham.

Offline c-side

  • Deceased † Rest In Peace
  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • ********
  • Posts: 3,032
  • The 'three' now have a cousin
    • View Profile
Re: Slaley Marriage Look-up (BTs seem to contain error)
« Reply #12 on: Thursday 02 October 14 21:55 BST (UK) »
I noticed that Catherine’s name is spelled Rodham in the BTs at a time when the rest of the family had the name written as Roddam.  A small inconsistency but puzzling.

There is only one Catherine Roddam being married between 1813 and 1837 in Northumberland.  She married Charles Hood in Newcastle St. Nicholas on 30/11/1828.  Both were ‘of the parish’ but it’s possible that she was in service in Newcastle.  The actual record is in the name of Roddam but she signed her name Rodham (an excellent signature - not practiced especially for the event as many are).

She and Charles are in Gateshead in 1851 and she gives her birth place as Hexham.

Christine