Anyway, back to topic!
A traveling woman was buried at St. Andrew, Boreham Essex January 2nd 1741!
and remembering that the new year started in March
May 12th 1742 at St. Andrew, Boreham Essex a poor traveller was buried
Results 11 to 20 of 150
-
05-09-2013, 10:01 AM #11Wilkes_mlGuest
-
05-09-2013, 11:33 AM #12Wilkes_mlGuest
Also at St. Andrews Boreham, Essex December 19th 1748 A travelling man was buried.
Boreham, seemed a popular place for travellers
And December 15th 1752 A traveller was buried at Boreham.
-
05-09-2013, 12:06 PM #13Wilkes_mlGuest
After all that discussion of Baptisms v Christenings I have finally come across a register (of Pleshley, Essex 1737-1812) where the first page is titled Christenings, but then the first entry is
William son of William & Indah Tyler baptised January 1st. the next 7 entries all say baptised, the rest of the page, nothing is entered just the names and dates!
So in this case, I believe the Curate doesn't differentiate at all between the two, so, regardless of the actual canon law (if one exists) I believe it must come down to the interpretation or personal belief of the curate or vicar in charge of the particular parish.
-
05-09-2013, 3:31 PM #14
- Join Date
- Oct 2004
- Location
- West Yorkshire
- Posts
- 1,736
Such as the fact that the Church of England teaches that there is no difference between baptism and christening?
In the examples you give, where baptism and christening are referred to as taking place on the same day, I would remind you of the tendency in the Book of Common Prayer for the Church of England to use two parallel and equivalent words - to aid understanding? - where we would often use only one, such as "we have erred, and strayed from thy ways"; "the devices and desires of our own hearts"; "he pardoneth and absolveth..." It seems unsafe to me to base an argument on this usage.
I accept the fact that some register entries do appear to distinguish between baptism and christening (but still disupte the "thousands"), and my best guess is that they take baptism to be the sacrament with water, and christening to be the later receiving of the child into the congregation. This seems to be supported by the fact that in the examples given, the baptism always comes first. However, this is not and never has been official Church of England teaching, and I would still like to see some contemporary explanation of what these clergy thought they were referring to.
An interesting quote from a book of church law (date?):
Some people suggest that Christened is sometimes being used to describe private baptisms as above.
Page 632 of Church & Clergy Law (by Henry W. Cripps, M.A. of the Middle Temple, Barrister at Law & late Fellow of New College, Oxford.) states-
“…If the child were baptized by any other lawful minister, then the minister of the parish where the child was born or christened shall examine and try whether the child be lawfully baptized or not.”
Arthur
-
06-09-2013, 2:51 PM #15
- Join Date
- Sep 2008
- Location
- Penge, London, England
- Posts
- 399
Trying again to get back on topic, this discussion on another forum describes an index someone has produced with particular attention to travellers: rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=646429.0 [www in front]. There is much verbiage over which libraries he will or will not supply it to and why, but it looks useful if you can access a copy. (I haven't seen it myself.)
-
06-09-2013, 6:20 PM #16Wilkes_mlGuest
Thanks for that Chris, I may just have to pop over to Canterbury to have a look at the East Gypsy Index, as there was a bit of a rumour that one of my branches from the Dartford area were travellers, but I haven't really looked into it much.
-
08-09-2013, 1:32 PM #17Wilkes_mlGuest
Well, I finally came across a Traveller who gave a name!
at St. Mary the Virgin Stebbing, Essex baptised January 30th 1719
William son of Thomas and Mary WILSON traveller
-
08-09-2013, 4:07 PM #18Wilkes_mlGuest
And another at St. Mary the Virgin, Stebbing, Essex.
Buried July 18th 1724 the wife of William Dawson traveller
-
10-09-2013, 7:59 AM #19Wilkes_mlGuest
Would the term "vagrants" mean the same as "travellers" in the parish records from the 1700's?
Baptised at Saffron Walden 1769 January 27th
Mordecai, son of Thomas & Sarah Print (Vagrants)
-
10-09-2013, 2:41 PM #20
- Join Date
- Jan 2010
- Location
- Wakefield, West Yorkshire
- Posts
- 626
Yes a good possibility.
Vagrants were strangers who had no visible means of support, it is therefore very possibly that Gypsies were often deemed vagrants.
Cheers
GuyAs we have gained from the past, we owe the future a debt, which we pay by sharing today.
Helping you trace your British Family History & British Genealogy.
All times are GMT. The time now is 7:00 AM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5
Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.
Bookmarks