old parish record help needed

[suecee]

Hi

My BADSLADE family is located almost solely in Surrey for its entire existence but I came across this marriage in Winchcombe, Gloucestershire in 1582. It has been transcribed as between JOHN BADSLADE and DORRITIE THONE. Could anyone confirm that this is correct please. The John and Dorritie look right but I cannot see Badslade. There seem to be more letters and it looks more like a k in the middle to me.

Thanks
Sue

[horselydown86]

John barkestale & dorrytie tho^rne

There is something odd in the formation of the third letter of his surname.

ADDED:

I agree that this is most unlikely to relate to your BADSLADE family.

[BushInn1746]

I see John BarkesDale in your image.

There was a Clement Barksdale born Winchcombe 1609 according to this ...
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clement_Barksdale

Regarding the 3rd letter of the surname. In documents of Warwickshire, this character seems to be a letter 'r' but as the first reply has noticed, it differs from the two 'r' in married.

Mark

[suecee]

Thank you both for your help. I had wondered if the horizontal line across the r was accidentally put on there first instead of on the first e.

Knowing what to look for I have found a 1630 burial for a John Barkesdale in Winchcombe which would confirm that he is indeed John Barkesdale.

I am relieved to know the Badslades are still in Surrey for the time being.

[BushInn1746]

Thank you both for your help. I had wondered if the horizontal line across the r was accidentally put on there first instead of on the first e.

I identified the same in a Warwickshire document as an 'r' . This paper or vellum was not always quite flat (like modern paper) and I'm fairly sure that the writer has accidentally caught the paper with the tip, leaving a horizontal line that shouldn't be there over the 'r' (in your first image, 3rd letter 'r' of Barkesdale).

2nd image: You can see the 's' with a fancy hook (looks f shaped without the horizontal cross, in old documents when mid word) and the 'd' stick slants left (some 'd' sticks slant 45 or more degrees left in the old hand), it is an 's' and 'd' intermingling (2nd image).

When an 's' is formed at the end of a word, in the old hand it can look like, somewhere between a small 'b' and an '8'.

The letter 'r' is taken very low when finishing the 'r' so as the tip goes up to start the next letter, it looks like it has nearly formed an odd looking w shape.

 --------

What this does show, is that someone elses transcription should never be relied upon, to form a tree!! You must methodically see each image, or original as you go back in your tree, for yourself!

You felt and also the first reply on this thread could see clearly the transcription you were given, was very wrong too.

Mark

[suecee]

it is so helpful to have access to online images of original documents. I am not an expert on old hands and just use a very helpful table of law hands examples of the alphabet.

I did think in the second image that the 's' was the plain stick and that all the fancy hook and flourish belonged to the 'd' - no wonder it is difficult to interpret when you don't know which bit belongs to which letter.

Again thank you for your expertise.

Sue