Childrey marriage 1715 Nathaniel FROGLEY

[familydar]

The IGI has a user-submitted record for this marriage on 8th June 1715 between Nathaniel FROGLEY & Ann DARLING.  I've checked the BT and it doesn't give the bride's name.  Could someone check the PR for me please to see if that does?  Many thanks.

best wishes
Jane :-)

[CaroleW]

on 8th June 1715

https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:NX3S-M5V (full date on BVRI)

No entry for an Ann Darling in 1715 on FS

[ribbo39]

Hi Jane,

Xmas greetings to you and all,

Not having much luck - there are 3 public trees on Anc...y all quoting the same marriage date to an Ann ??. and nothing more.

Unfortunately, the Oxfordshire FHS have not transcribed the registers for Childrey (and they say there are only 2  marriages but no details)
and the Berks FHS don't list Childrey amongst the locations for marriages on their CDs either.

I think it may be a case to contact the Berks RO, who hold the original registers from 1558-1980 (marriages);
http://www.berkshirerecordoffice.org.uk/family-history/parish-register-guide/?letter=c#results

Hope you have more success,

Alan

[Sloe Gin]

https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:NX3S-M5V (full date on BVRI)

No entry for an Ann Darling in 1715 on FS

There wouldn't be, because their source is the Bishop's Transcripts which Jane has already checked.
https://familysearch.org/search/catalog/results?count=20&query=%2Bfilm_number%3A1279454

As Alan says, it looks like the Berks RO is the only option for the PR.
It could be that the LDS contributor got their information from elsewhere, perhaps a family bible or a will.

[CaroleW]

Hi

It could be that the LDS contributor got their information from elsewhere, perhaps a family bible or a will.

The full date is from the BVRI (British Vital Records Index) 1538-1940 which as far as I know, does not include contributed entries

[jonw65]

The IGI has marriages for Childrey, 1558-1695, 1698-1812. In batch number M041091. Info from Hugh Wallis's Batch Numbers site.
And indeed there are entries on there, taken from LDS microfilm 88231 - which is Parish Registers for Childrey, baptisms, marriages, burials, 1558-1812.

I think it was the LDS policy at one time (ill concieved, as I think they later accepted) that if someone submitted an entry that duplicated one from an extracted batch, then the extracted entry was removed. Leaving only the submitted entry, with no proper source verification!

In Childrey, from batch M041091, other marriages include, for example, Richard Giles + Sarah Darling, 4 Nov 1717.
So your marriage was probably in batch M041091 originally, and hopefully Darling is the right spouse. We know that there definitely was a Frogley marriage via the BT.
Might be of some comfort, but, as said, it looks like you may have to get the definitive answer at or from Berkshire RO

[Sloe Gin]

I think it was the LDS policy at one time (ill concieved, as I think they later accepted) that if someone submitted an entry that duplicated one from an extracted batch, then the extracted entry was removed. Leaving only the submitted entry, with no proper source verification!

As Guy Etchells often reminds us, the IGI was never intended to be a complete record of parish registers.  It's an index to the ordinances of the LDS Church, which is not the same thing. 

Anyway it sounds hopeful for Jane's quest.

The full date is from the BVRI (British Vital Records Index) 1538-1940 which as far as I know, does not include contributed entries

The submitted entry is from the IGI.  This is the one that includes the bride's name.

[ribbo39]

Hi all,

I'm inclined to the view that either Ann's surname was not included in the register at time of marriage  or that it was indecipherable.

The fact that the on-line trees; the FS, or  FindMyPast don't show a surname would indicate its a case of one of the above.

Either way I think its now a Berks RO task for Jane.

The other point I would make is that there is Nathaniel Frogley marrying Martha Darling in 1735.
Looks like a family connection.

Alan

[jonw65]

If you are in Australia, then most probably you wont be going to Berkshire RO
From their website, they charge £24.00 per hour for research (minimum charge £12.00) They say they can complete a specific search such as one entry in a parish register in 30 minutes.

An alternative is to order that mf no. 88231 to view at an LDS Family History Centre.
It is though available at the London Family History Centre, currently located at the National Archives at Kew. 
So someone going to Kew might be willing to do a lookup, if nobody can do one in Reading.
John